Hyderabad Court protects actor Chiranjeevi’s personality rights, restrains over 30 platforms from misusing his identity
Hyderabad court granted interim relief to Chiranjeevi, restraining over 30 online platforms from using his name, image, voice, or likeness—including AI and digital formats—without consent, citing potential commercial and reputational harm.
ADVERTISEMENT
Hyderabad city civil court has passed an ad-interim injunction protecting veteran Telugu actor Konidela Chiranjeevi from the unauthorized use of his name, image, voice, or likeness across online platforms, including potential AI-generated and Metaverse formats, Bar and Bench reported.
The order, delivered by Chief Judge S Sasidhar Reddy on September 26, comes in response to a plea filed by Chiranjeevi against over 30 online entities, including e-commerce stores, YouTube channels, and digital media platforms, accused of exploiting the actor’s persona for commercial or personal gain without consent.
The court recognized Chiranjeevi, a Padma Bhushan and Padma Vibhushan awardee, as one of the most prominent figures in Telugu and Southern cinema, noting that his titles such as “Mega Star, Chiru, Annayya, Boss” and “Mega Star Chiru,” along with his voice and image, are integral to his personality and carry significant commercial and reputational value.
The actor highlighted that several platforms were selling merchandise like T-shirts and posters featuring his stills and film titles, while AI-generated images, memes, and videos misrepresented him in ways potentially harmful to his reputation.
The court agreed that such usage could mislead the public into thinking Chiranjeevi endorsed the products or ideas depicted. “The images appear to have been created by morphing the plaintiff’s face and used for commercial purposes or propagating political, anti-national, or salacious content. The potential damage is irreparable,” the court noted.
The injunction restrains defendants 1 to 33 and 36 from exploiting Chiranjeevi’s identity in any medium, physical, electronic, or future digital platforms such as AI-based media or the Metaverse.
Notably, the court dispensed with prior notice to most defendants, citing the rapid digital dissemination of content, but interim relief was denied against the Ministry of Electronics and IT and the Department of Telecommunications due to mandatory notice requirements under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code.
The case is scheduled for the next hearing on October 27.
