ARTICLE
18 September 2024

Delhi High Court Grants Ad-interim Injunction To Jackie Shroff To Protect The Actor's "Personality Rights" From Infringement

PL
Pioneer Legal

Contributor

Pioneer Legal is a new age law firm with a dynamic approach to revolutionize the legal landscape in India. We excel in providing commercially viable legal solutions in tandem with high happiness quotient for our attorneys and clients.
The Delhi High Court ("Delhi HC") vide its order dated May 15, 2024, in the matter of Jaikishan Kakubhai Saraf alias Jackie Shroff vs. The Peppy Store and Ors. [I.A. 10961/2024 IN CS(COMM) 389/2024].
India Intellectual Property
  • The Delhi High Court ("Delhi HC") vide its order dated May 15, 2024, in the matter of Jaikishan Kakubhai Saraf alias Jackie Shroff vs. The Peppy Store and Ors. [I.A. 10961/2024 IN CS(COMM) 389/2024] , has granted an adinterim injunction to actor Jackie Shroff ("Plaintiff") till the next date of hearing, in a suit filed by the Plaintiff seeking permanent injunction against the defendants from using his registered trademarks "BHIDU" and "Bhidu ka Khopcha" as well as for protection of his 'personality rights' , by prohibiting the defendants from misappropriating the Plaintiff's name 'JACKIE SHROFF' and other sobriquets including 'JACKIE' , 'JAGGU DADA' and his voice and/or image for any commercial purposes without the Plaintiff's consent/authorization.
  • The Delhi HC observed that the defendant's unauthorized use of the Plaintiff's characteristics such as his name, voice, image, likeness, mannerisms, gestures and other uniquely identifiable characteristics associated with the Plaintiff not only infringes upon his rights but also dilutes the brand equity painstakingly built by the Plaintiff over the years.
  • After considering the Plaintiff's and the defendants' submissions, the Delhi HC restrained the defendants no. 3 (Ice Poster), 4 (Inverted Mushrooms), 6 (Kegg Gaming), 7 (Meme Archives), 13 (Reclation Technologies Pvt. Ltd.) and 14 (Zedge Inc.) from infringing the Plaintiff's personality/publicity rights. However, the Delhi HC did not grant the injunction against defendant no. 5 (Mr. Mahesh Keshwala), pending receipt of their response in the matter, noting that the YouTube video in contention uploaded by the said defendant represents a form of artistic expression and restricting such creative expressions might have far reaching consequences, potentially deterring the public from exercising their right to free speech due to fear of legal repercussions.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More