New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has granted significant protection to podcaster and entrepreneur Raj Shamani, directing multiple social media platforms to remove objectionable, defamatory and AI-generated content targeting him. The order, passed on November 17 and made public on November 20, 2025, marks another major step in a growing line of judicial interventions aimed at safeguarding personality and publicity rights in the digital era.
Court protects Shamani from misuse of image and AI-generated content
The interim order was issued by Justice Manmeet P.S. Arora while hearing Shamani’s plea seeking to restrain the unauthorised use of his image, likeness, persona and voice. The petition also sought protection against morphed, distorted and AI-generated deepfake content that could harm his reputation and business interests.
The court observed that Shamani, identified in the suit as plaintiff no. 1, had the right to safeguard his personality and digital identity. “The plaintiff no. 1 (Shamani) is also entitled to protect himself against morphed and distorted content which is defaming and demeaning or patently false as it is bound to affect his reputation and goodwill,” the order stated.
Justice Arora emphasised that such manipulated content—especially deepfakes—poses a serious risk to individuals operating in public-facing professions, making judicial safeguards essential.
Removal of infringing posts across platforms
As part of the interim relief, the High Court directed social media companies to block, remove or take down all infringing posts—particularly content generated through AI or deepfake technology. The order underscores the court’s increasing concern over the rapid spread of misleading and fabricated material online, and the difficulty individuals face in combating it without legal intervention.
Platforms were told to act swiftly and ensure that Shamani’s personality rights are not violated through misrepresentation or unauthorised recreation of his identity.
Protection extended to Shamani’s podcast and trademarks
Beyond personal identity misuse, the court also addressed issues surrounding intellectual property associated with Shamani’s popular podcast, Figuring Out with Raj Shamani. It held that his rights under the Copyright Act—including the exclusive right to communicate and distribute his works to the public—are fully protected.
Additionally, the High Court recognised that the registered trademarks “FIGURING OUT” are entitled to legal protection. It restrained respondents from using the trademark “Figuring Out” in any form without authorisation, preventing confusion, dilution and unfair exploitation of the podcast’s brand value.
The ruling also bars entities from streaming, hosting or sharing Shamani’s copyrighted podcast content without permission, formalising a broad shield around his creative and commercial output.
Part of a wider judicial trend on personality rights
The decision comes at a time when Indian courts are increasingly addressing the threats posed by emerging technology—including AI image generation and deepfake tools—to personal identity and celebrity rights.
In recent months, the Delhi High Court has granted similar protections to several public figures. Among them are actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan, Jaya Bachchan, Hrithik Roshan, filmmaker Karan Johar, singer Kumar Sanu, Telugu actor Akkineni Nagarjuna, ‘Art of Living’ founder Ravi Shankar and journalist Sudhir Chaudhary.
These cases collectively mark a judicial acknowledgement that reputation, likeness and digital identity form an integral part of an individual’s personality rights—requiring robust protection in an evolving digital landscape.
A significant step toward regulating digital misuse
With digital manipulation tools becoming more accessible, the potential for reputational harm has intensified. The Delhi High Court’s order in Raj Shamani’s case reinforces the principle that the law must evolve to safeguard individuals from technological misuse.
The ruling acts as a reminder that personal brand, identity and intellectual property remain legally enforceable—regardless of the medium through which violations occur.