- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief To Salman Khan Against Misuse Of His Name And Images For Commercial Merchandise
Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief to Salman Khan Against Misuse of His Name and Images for Commercial Merchandise
The leading law firm in India, DSK Legal, represented Bollywood actor Salman Khan in securing crucial interim relief before the Delhi High Court. The Court directed online platforms and intermediaries to take action against entities misusing Khan’s personality rights. The Court also indicated that it would itself pass stay orders against defendants commercially exploiting Khan’s name, photographs, and likeness without authorisation.
Khan approached the High Court seeking directions against several entities to restrain them from unauthorisedly using his personality rights.
The Delhi High Court on Thursday asked social media and intermediaries to act on the complaint by Bollywood Actor Salman Khan alleging violation of his personality rights [Salman Khan v Ashok Kumar/John Doe & Ors].
Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora stated that she would pass stay orders against defendants misusing Khan's name, photos, and other personality attributes for sale of commercial merchandise.
"Defendants 2, 4, and 6 are directed to treat the plaint complaint under the IT Intermediaries Rules, and notice has been issued to them. Action is to be taken within 3 days. Defendant 2, who is allegedly violating the trademark, is directed to take into consideration the IP rights before making its decision. I will pass stay orders on the defendants regarding commercial merchandise."-the court said.
Khan approached the High Court seeking directions against several entities, including unknown (John Doe) defendants to restrain them from unauthorisedly using his personality rights.
His counsel, Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi, told the Court that Apple, an AI chatbot, a few e-marketplaces, and RedBubble have allowed infringement of Khan's personality rights. He also objected to certain fan accounts using photoshopped pictures.
"What is your issue with fan accounts?" the Court asked.
"It is my registered trademark. They use photoshopped photos, these are not my real photos," Sethi said.
The Court then asked an intermediary about its policy when a person flags violation of personality rights through merchandise being sold online.
"If the party directly writes to you to say that his personality rights are being violated because there is merchandise on your website which is not authorized, what's your policy?" it asked.
"These links are already inactive. We act on orders. It is case to case, there is no policy in place, but we do it," the counsel for the intermediary replied.
The Court then asked an intermediary about its policy when a person flags violation of personality rights through unauthorised merchandise. The intermediary confirmed that links were already inactive and that they act on orders on a case-by-case basis.
The veteran actor joins a long list of celebrities who have recently approached courts to stop misuse of their personality attributes, Karan Johar, and others.
Along with Sethi, advocates Nizam Pasha and Shreya Sethia also appeared for Salman Khan.
They were briefed by Parag Khandhar, Chandrima Mitra, Tapan Radkar, Zara Dhanbhoora, Krishan Kumar and Siddharth Kaushik of DSK Legal.
Click to know more about DSK Legal
If you have a news or deal publication or would like to collaborate on content, columns, or article publications, connect with the Legal Era News Network Team and email us at info@legalera.in or call us on +91 8879634922.


