Preity Zinta moves Bombay HC over AI deepfakes, court asks Google and Meta to frame takedown plan

BOllywood doer and IPL dealership co-owner Preity Zinta has at present taken the effectual route, forthcoming the Bombay High Court over alleged deepfakes, morphed images and other unauthorised digital content that she says uses her identity without permission.The allegationsAccording to Bar and Bench, Preity has named Google LLC, Meta Platforms Inc., domain name registrars, several identified individuals and John Doe defendants in her lawsuit, enabling legal action against unknown people who may have created or shared the alleged content. The plea states that AI-generated deepfake videos, morphed images and chatbot-style conversations using her likeness have been circulating on platforms such as YouTube, Instagram and Facebook without her knowledge or consent.Appearing for the actor, senior advocate Venkatesh Dhond told the court that advances in AI have made deepfakes far more convincing than before, making it increasingly difficult for viewers to distinguish fake content from real content. He requested urgent directions, asking websites and online intermediaries to remove all the allegedly infringing content identified in the petition, while also seeking wider protection against the future spread of unauthorised AI-generated material featuring Zinta.The legal team further argued that her face, identity and public image had allegedly been used by AI tools to create fake advertisements, promotional material and other commercial content without her permission. According to the suit, this violates her personality rights, moral rights and right to privacy. It also alleges that websites operating under domain names containing her name, despite having no connection to her, are being used to host such material.What Google, Meta and others told the courtThe lawyers appearing for Google and Meta told the Bombay High Court that the companies were willing to remove links containing morphed or obscene content, provided that Preity identified the specific URLs.However, they urged the court not to pass a broad order directing online platforms to constantly monitor or take down content that may not violate any rights. They also submitted that some of the links mentioned in the petition did not contain objectionable material.A domain name registrar that has also been named in the case clarified that its responsibility is limited to registering domain names. It told the court that it does not host content and therefore cannot act against material uploaded on social media platforms or other websites.Court wants a balanced approachJustice Madhav Jamdar observed that any order passed by the court should be carefully designed so that only objectionable material is removed while genuine online content remains untouched.While acknowledging that the case raises valid concerns warranting protection, the judge directed all parties to engage in discussions and develop a workable takedown mechanism that can effectively identify and remove infringing content without affecting lawful material.The court's approach reflects the growing challenge of regulating AI-generated content, where fake and authentic material can often appear similar and large volumes of online content make individual scrutiny difficult.Similar cases by celebritiesPreity's case comes after several other celebrities approached the Bombay High Court over the unauthorised use of their names, images and identities online. Actors Kartik Aaryan, Shatrughan Sinha, Shilpa Shetty, Akshay Kumar and Suniel Shetty, as well as singers Asha Bhosle and Arijit Singh, have all sought similar legal protection in recent years.Before moving the court, Preity was granted permission to file the suit under Clause XII of the Letters Patent. The provision allows the Bombay High Court to hear a case even if only part of the dispute falls within its jurisdiction.On June 16, Justice Abhay Ahuja permitted the actor to proceed with the lawsuit after hearing her legal team's submissions. They argued that while the alleged content may have been uploaded or hosted from different parts of the world, the impact on her reputation and goodwill is felt in Mumbai, where she is based.The case was heard on July 3 before Justice Madhav Jamdar, who did not issue any immediate ex parte directions. Instead, he asked all the parties, including Google and Meta, to discuss and arrive at a practical way to remove objectionable content while leaving legitimate material unaffected. The matter is scheduled to be heard again on July 6.