The intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and intellectual property law has raised critical questions about identity, ownership, and unauthorised exploitation of personal attributes. In a landmark decision delivered on 29 September 2025, the Bombay High Court (Justice Arif S. Doctor), in Asha Bhosle v. Mayk Inc. & Ors., Interim Application (L) No. 30382 of 2025, recognised and protected the personality rights of legendary singer Asha Bhosle, restraining various entities from misusing her voice, image, and likeness through AI technologies and unauthorised merchandise.
The ruling comes at a crucial time when generative AI platforms are increasingly capable of cloning voices and creating digital avatars of celebrities without their consent. This case reaffirms the legal recognition of personality rights and moral rights in India and extends protection against emerging technological exploitation.
Background of the Case
Parties Involved
Plaintiff/Applicant: Asha Bhosle, an iconic playback singer with a career spanning over seven decades. She has sung in multiple genres—film music, ghazals, classical, pop, and devotional—and is globally recognised for her unmatched repertoire.
Defendants:
- Mayk Inc. (Defendant No.1) and its AI platform (Defendant No.2), which offered the cloning of Asha Bhosle’s voice.
- Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. (Defendant No.3) and Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd. (Defendant No.4) for unauthorised sale of posters and merchandise.
- Harry Tiwari (Defendant No.5), a sketch artist selling T-shirts and hoodies with Asha Bhosle’s images.
- Google LLC (Defendant No.6), as operator of YouTube, where cloned AI voice songs were uploaded.
- John Doe (Defendant No.7), unidentified parties engaged in clandestine misuse.
Plaintiff’s Reputation and Status
The Court recorded Asha Bhosle’s eminent stature, citing:
Awards: Two National Film Awards, Dadasaheb Phalke Award (2000), BBC Lifetime Achievement (2002), Padma Vibhushan (2008), and multiple Filmfare Awards.
World Records: Listed in the Guinness Book of World Records (2011) as the “Most Recorded Artist.”
International Recognition: Grammy nominations, IIFA awards, and global accolades.
Social Media Presence: Millions of followers across Instagram, Facebook, Twitter (X), and YouTube, reflecting immense goodwill.
The Court observed that such popularity inherently gave her common law publicity rights over her name, voice, image, and other personal attributes.
The Alleged Infringements
The plaintiff alleged multiple instances of unauthorised use of her persona:
AI Voice Cloning by Mayk Inc. (Defendant 1 & 2)
- Operated a website offering cloned versions of her voice, allowing users to generate songs in her style.
- Technology enabled the manipulation of her unique singing mannerisms, tone, and vocal technique.
- Amounted to unauthorised distortion and commercial exploitation.
Merchandise Misuse on Amazon, Flipkart, and Harry Tiwari’s Website (Defendant 3–5)
- Posters, T-shirts, hoodies, and caricatures of Asha Bhosle were sold without consent.
- Platforms facilitated third parties to commercially exploit her identity.
AI-Generated Songs on YouTube (Defendant 6)
- Several videos were uploaded with AI-generated versions of her voice performing songs she had never sung.
- These videos misled viewers and were monetised by content creators.
The Court noted that such misuse was twofold—an infringement of commercial publicity rights and a violation of moral rights under Section 38-B of the Copyright Act, 1957.
Issues Before the Court
- Whether the unauthorised AI cloning of Asha Bhosle’s voice and likeness amounts to a violation of personality rights.
- Whether selling merchandise and uploading AI-generated songs without consent constitutes infringement.
- Extent of applicability of Section 38-B (performer’s moral rights) in cases involving AI misuse.
- Balancing personality rights with freedom of speech and expression.
Arguments
Plaintiff’s Contentions
- Asha Bhosle’s name, voice, image, and likeness are exclusive attributes of her personality.
- Unauthorised use causes commercial exploitation, dilution, and tarnishment of her identity.
- Moral rights extend to protection against distortion and mutilation of performances.
- Voice cloning is not merely imitation but a misappropriation of personal identity.
- Courts have previously upheld similar protections in:
Arijit Singh v. Codible Ventures LLP (2024 SCC OnLine Bom 2445)
Aishwarya Rai Bachchan v. Aishwaryaworld.com (2025 SCC OnLine Del 5943)
Defendant No.6 (Google LLC)’s Submissions
- Sought time to take instructions.
- Agreed to take down infringing YouTube links identified in the plaint but reserved rights regarding broader reliefs.
Court’s Reasoning
Justice Arif S. Doctor observed:
- Asha Bhosle’s pre-eminent status in music is undisputed.
- Her personality rights include control over her name, voice, photograph, image, caricature, likeness, persona, and signature.
- AI tools enabling the conversion of voices into those of celebrities without permission constitute a violation of personality rights.
- Such unauthorised use undermines an individual’s right to prevent deceptive and commercial misuse of identity.
- The balance of convenience and irreparable harm clearly favoured the plaintiff.
- The Court emphasised that AI exploitation of celebrity voices is not protected by free speech, as it is inherently commercial misappropriation.
The Court’s Order
The Bombay High Court granted ad-interim injunctions:
Against Mayk Inc. (Defendants 1 & 2) and Harry Tiwari (Defendant 5):
- Restrained from using Asha Bhosle’s voice, name, image, signature, likeness, or persona through any means, including AI, without consent.
- Ordered to remove infringing AI voice models, merchandise, and digital content.
Against Amazon and Flipkart (Defendants 3 & 4):
- Directed to take down unauthorised listings of posters, caricatures, and merchandise.
- Required to share seller details and subscriber information with the plaintiff.
Against Google LLC (Defendant 6):
- Directed to remove the specific infringing YouTube URLs.
- Required to furnish the uploader’s details to the plaintiff for further legal action.
General Relief (John Doe Orders):
- Injunction extended to unidentified persons engaged in clandestine misuse.
- The Court held that unauthorised AI cloning of a celebrity’s voice is a violation of personality rights and amounts to technological exploitation.
Significance of the Judgment
- Strengthening Personality Rights in India: This case is a landmark because it explicitly recognises that AI misuse of voice and image constitutes infringement.
- Expanding Performers’ Moral Rights: Section 38-B of the Copyright Act, which protects performers against distortion of performances, was applied to AI-generated content.
- Impact on E-commerce and Digital Platforms: The Court imposed responsibility on platforms like Amazon, Flipkart, and YouTube to take down infringing content and disclose seller/uploader details.
- Setting a Precedent for AI Misuse Cases: By extending legal reasoning from traditional publicity rights to AI, the judgment sets a precedent for future disputes involving deepfakes, face morphing, and voice cloning.
- Balancing Technology and Law: The ruling does not stifle technology but ensures that innovation respects legal and moral boundaries.
Implications for the Future
- For Celebrities: Enhanced ability to protect their identity in the digital age.
- For AI Companies: Need for clear licensing frameworks before using celebrity voices or images.
- For E-commerce and Platforms: Obligation to act swiftly against infringing content.
- For the Law: A push towards statutory recognition of digital personality rights.
Conclusion
The Bombay High Court’s recognition of Asha Bhosle’s personality rights against AI misuse marks a historic step in Indian jurisprudence. It bridges traditional intellectual property concepts with the challenges of the AI era, ensuring that technology does not override the dignity, autonomy, and commercial interests of individuals.
By restraining AI voice cloning and unauthorised commercial exploitation, the Court has reaffirmed the principle that a person—particularly a celebrity—has the exclusive right to control the commercial and moral use of their identity. This decision will likely shape the contours of digital rights, AI regulation, and celebrity protection in India for years to come.