PERSONALITY RIGHTS IN INDIA

Personality rights in India empower individuals to control the commercial use of their identity, including name, image, likeness, or other distinctive traits. These rights, though not explicitly codified, have been recognized through judicial interpretations, intertwining with the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

MEANING, DEFINITION & EXPLANATION

Personality rights, often referred to as publicity rights, allow individuals to prevent unauthorized exploitation of their persona for commercial gain. This encompasses control over one’s name, likeness, voice, signature, and other personal attributes. In India, these rights are seen as an extension of the right to privacy, ensuring individuals can protect their identity from misuse.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND / EVOLUTION

The evolution of personality rights in India has been gradual, primarily shaped by judicial pronouncements. A significant milestone was the Supreme Court’s decision in R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu, (1994) 6 SCC 632, also known as the “Auto Shankar Case.” The Court held that the right to privacy is implicit under Article 21, emphasizing that unauthorized publication of one’s life story without consent violates this right. This case underscored the need to protect personal autonomy against unauthorized exploitation.

LEGAL PROVISIONS / PROCEDURE / SPECIFICATIONS / CRITERIA

While India lacks a specific statute dedicated to personality rights, various legal provisions offer indirect protection:

• Constitutional Provisions:
  Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which the Supreme Court has interpreted to include the right to privacy. In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1, the Court affirmed that privacy is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

• Intellectual Property Laws:

  • Trademark Law: The Trade Marks Act, 1999, under Section 2(m), includes “names” in the definition of a “mark,” allowing individuals to register their names as trademarks to prevent unauthorized commercial use.
  • Copyright Law: The Copyright Act, 1957, under Section 57, grants authors moral rights, including the right to protect their work from distortion or mutilation that would harm their honor or reputation. In Amar Nath Sehgal v. Union of India, 2005 (30) PTC 253 (Del), the Delhi High Court upheld the artist’s moral rights, ordering the government to return his mural and awarding damages for its unauthorized removal.

CASE LAWS / PRECEDENTS / JUDGMENTS

1. Titan Industries Ltd. v. Ramkumar Jewellers, (2012) 50 PTC 486 (Del):
   The Delhi High Court recognized the right of publicity, stating that unauthorized use of a celebrity’s name or image for commercial purposes amounts to infringement of personality rights. In this case, the Court granted an injunction restraining the defendant from using the plaintiff’s advertisements featuring the celebrities, acknowledging the violation of personality rights.

2. ICC Development (International) Ltd. v. Arvee Enterprises, 2003 (26) PTC 245 (Del):
   The Delhi High Court held that personality rights vest with individuals and not corporations. The Court emphasized that right of publicity can be inherited or assigned, but a corporation cannot claim such rights unless specifically assigned to it.

3. Gautam Gambhir v. D.A.P. & Co. & Anr., 2017 SCC OnLine Del 12158:
   Cricketer Gautam Gambhir filed a suit against a restaurant using his name without authorization. The Delhi High Court dismissed the suit, noting that the defendant was also named Gautam Gambhir and was not attempting to mislead consumers into believing an association with the cricketer. This case highlights the complexities in enforcing personality rights, especially when dealing with common names.

DOCTRINES / THEORIES

• Doctrine of Passing Off:
  This common law tort is used to enforce unregistered trademark rights, including personality rights. It prevents one party from misrepresenting their goods or services as those of another, thereby protecting the goodwill associated with an individual’s persona. In the context of personality rights, passing off can be invoked when an individual’s identity is used without authorization, leading to potential confusion or deception among the public.

MAXIMS / PRINCIPLES

• “Ubi jus ibi remedium”:
  This legal maxim means “where there is a right, there is a remedy.” It underscores the principle that the law provides a remedy for every violation of a right, including personality rights. In the context of unauthorized use of one’s persona, individuals can seek legal recourse to enforce their rights and obtain appropriate remedies.

INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS

• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR):
  Article 12 of the UDHR states that no one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with their privacy, family, home, or correspondence, nor to attacks upon their honor and reputation. This aligns with the protection of personality rights, emphasizing the importance of safeguarding individual identity and dignity.

• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR):
  Article 17 of the ICCPR mirrors the provisions of Article 12 of the UDHR, reinforcing the international recognition of the right to privacy and protection against unlawful attacks on honor and reputation. India, as a signatory to these international instruments, is obligated to uphold these rights, which encompass aspects of personality rights.

FUTURE IMPLICATIONS

As digital media continues to expand, the unauthorized exploitation of personal identities is likely to increase. The absence of specific legislation on personality rights in India may lead to ambiguity in addressing such violations. The evolution of these rights in the Indian context will require further judicial interpretations or dedicated statutory provisions to ensure individuals can adequately protect their identities in an era of rapid technological advancements.