Janhvi Kapoor personality rights case: 552 URLs ordered removed
The Delhi High Court is examining personality rights in the digital realm. Actor Janhvi Kapoor's plea against online identity misuse prompted this review. An amicus curiae was appointed to assist the court with broader legal questions. The court previously ordered the removal of 552 sexually explicit URLs. Further classification of online content is underway for legal consideration.
The Delhi High Court is currently assessing the legal boundaries of personality rights in the digital realm, specifically in relation to actor Janhvi Kapoor's legal battle against unauthorized use of her identity online. Advocate Gautam Bhatia has been appointed as amicus curiae to assist the court in examining the complexities of the case.
Janhvi Kapoor's petition involves allegations of unauthorized use of her identity across thousands of online URLs. While she initially identified 6,884 URLs, the court did not grant a blanket direction to remove all of them. Instead, the URLs are being categorized based on the nature of the content involved.
One category focuses on URLs containing sexually explicit and vulgar material. Another category pertains to URLs that directly exploit Janhvi Kapoor's personality rights for financial gain. Additionally, there are links that use her name or likeness to promote merchandise or services. The court's categorization is crucial as it helps determine the legal implications of each individual reference.
Advocate Gautam Bhatia's appointment comes in light of a similar arrangement made in another personality rights case involving actor Vivek Oberoi. The two cases together raise broader questions about the protection afforded to public figures online and how these rights intersect with legitimate digital expression.
Janhvi Kapoor's legal team sought interim relief during a recent hearing, emphasizing the need for an early decision on the removal of the designated URLs. As the court deliberates on the different categories of links, the proceedings may also provide clarity on the extent of personality rights in cases involving vast amounts of online content.
Written by urgent.news from Times of India's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.