The unauthorized commercial exploitation of celebrities' identities through the use of their images, names, or likenesses in advertisements and marketing campaigns without prior consent has emerged as a contentious legal issue. The recent incident involving Indian Olympic shooter Manu Bhaker, whose images were used by several brands in congratulatory advertisements without sponsorship or permission, highlights the growing challenge of safeguarding personality rights. This article delves into the legal framework governing personality rights in India, including the Copyright Act, 1957 , and the Trademark Act, of 1999 , while examining relevant case law, to provide a comprehensive understanding of the legal protections afforded to celebrities against unauthorized exploitation of their persona.

Introduction
The meteoric rise of Manu Bhaker, culminating in her remarkable achievement of two bronze medals at the Paris Olympics, has not only brought her glory but also shone a spotlight on the evolving landscape of personality rights in India. While the nation rejoiced in her victory, several brands, including Bajaj Foods , LIC, and others , seized the opportunity to bask in the reflected glory of her success by utilizing her images and videos in congratulatory advertisements without her explicit consent or any pre-existing sponsorship agreements. This audacious act of commercial exploitation has reignited the debate on the boundaries of permissible use of a celebrity's identity and underscores the pressing need for a comprehensive legal framework to safeguard personality rights.

Personality rights, although not expressly codified in Indian statutes, have been recognized and upheld through judicial pronouncements over the years. These rights, often synonymous with publicity rights, empower individuals to exert control over the commercial exploitation of their name, image, likeness, or other distinctive attributes that constitute their persona. The Copyright Act, 1957 , and the Trademark Act, 1999 , serve as the primary legal bulwarks for protecting these rights, with the judiciary playing a pivotal role in interpreting and expanding their ambit. The unauthorized use of Manu Bhaker's image for commercial purposes, therefore, raises pertinent questions about the extent to which these statutes and judicial precedents offer recourse to individuals whose personality rights have been infringed upon.

Furthermore, the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) Code, a self-regulatory mechanism for the advertising industry, explicitly prohibits the use of an individual's name or image in advertisements without their permission if such use confers an unjustified advantage on the product or service being advertised. The actions of the brands in Bhaker's case appear to be in direct contravention of this code, raising concerns about the efficacy of self-regulation in curbing such exploitative practices.

This article delves into the complexities of personality rights in India, examining the relevant statutory provisions, landmark judicial decisions, and the ASCI Code to provide a nuanced understanding of the legal landscape. The Manu Bhaker incident serves as a compelling backdrop to analyze the adequacy of existing laws and regulations in safeguarding the rights of individuals against unauthorized commercial use of their identity. It also underscores the urgent need for legislative reforms to ensure that the burgeoning field of personality rights receives the robust legal protection it deserves.

Legal Framework Governing Personality Rights

The Indian Constitution

While not explicitly recognizing personality rights, provides a broad framework under which such rights can be protected. Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, has been interpreted by the judiciary to include the right to privacy. This right, as established in the landmark case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India , extends to the protection of an individual's personality and identity from unauthorized commercial exploitation.

The Copyright Act, 1957

Offers protection to authors and performers by granting them moral rights over their creations. These rights, enshrined under Sections 57 and 38B, allow individuals to claim ownership, restrain unauthorized use, and seek damages for any distortion or modification of their work that could harm their reputation. The principles of personality rights align with these moral rights, providing a legal basis for celebrities to protect their identity from unauthorized use in advertisements.

The Trademark Act, 1999

Further safeguards personality rights by restricting the registration of a name as a trademark without consent. Under Section 14 of the Act, celebrities can register their names as trademarks to prevent misuse. This act of registration not only protects their identity but also empowers them to take legal action against any unauthorized commercial use of their name, image, or other distinctive attributes.

Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) Code

The ASCI Code plays a crucial role in regulating ethical advertising practices in India. It explicitly prohibits the use of an individual's name, image, or persona in advertisements without their permission if such use confers an unjustified advantage on the product advertised or tends to bring the individual into disrepute. This regulation was highlighted during the Tokyo Olympics 2020, where the ASCI criticized brands for leveraging athletes' victories without obtaining proper consent. The ASCI Code thus acts as a deterrent against the unauthorized commercial exploitation of celebrities' identities.

Judicial Precedents

Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India & Ors:

In this landmark case, Bollywood actor Anil Kapoor filed a lawsuit against 21 defendants for unauthorized use of his image, name, and famous dialogue "jhakaas" in various commercial products, including digital stickers, posters, and t-shirts. The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Kapoor, stating that such unauthorized use of a celebrity's identity unfairly harmed their reputation and violated their personality rights. The court's decision underscored the legal principle that the unauthorized exploitation of a celebrity's persona is illegal and can have adverse consequences on their livelihood and fundamental rights.

Arijit Singh v. Codible Ventures LLP:

Renowned singer Arijit Singh brought legal action against Codible Ventures LLP for the unauthorized creation and commercial use of content featuring his identity. The Delhi High Court acknowledged Singh's substantial goodwill and reputation, emphasizing the need to protect his celebrity status from exploitation. The court ruled that the defendant's actions, including the promotion and sale of merchandise bearing Singh's personality traits without permission, constituted a violation of his personality rights.

Jaikishan Kakubhai Saraf Alias Jackie Shroff v. The Peppy Store & Ors:

Actor Jackie Shroff filed a lawsuit against several defendants for infringing his personality rights by using his name, image, voice, and other unique characteristics in commercial products without his consent. The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Shroff, stating that the defendants' actions misled the public into believing that he endorsed their activities, thereby violating his personality rights.

Conclusion
The unauthorized use of Manu Bhaker's images by various brands without her consent presents a clear violation of her personality rights. The legal notices being sent by IOS Sports & Entertainment to these brands are not only justified but necessary to deter future instances of such exploitation. The Copyright Act, 1957 , and the Trademark Act, 1999 , provide a robust legal framework for the protection of personality rights in India, ensuring that celebrities maintain control over the commercial use of their identity.

The judicial precedents discussed above further reinforce the legal protections available to celebrities against unauthorized exploitation of their persona. The courts have consistently upheld the rights of celebrities to protect their identity from misuse, recognizing the substantial goodwill and reputation associated with their persona. These rulings serve as a strong deterrent against brands and individuals who seek to exploit a celebrity's identity for commercial gain without permission.

The legal landscape surrounding personality rights in India is evolving, with courts and statutory bodies increasingly recognizing the need to protect celebrities from unauthorized commercial exploitation. The case involving Manu Bhaker underscores the importance of adhering to legal norms and securing consent before using a celebrity's identity in advertisements or marketing campaigns. As the market for celebrity endorsements continues to grow, brands must respect the legal rights of celebrities and seek proper permissions before leveraging their identity for commercial purposes. Failure to do so not only exposes brands to legal action but also undermines the integrity of the advertising industry.

In conclusion, the protection of personality rights is essential to safeguarding the reputation and livelihood of celebrities. The legal framework in India, supported by judicial precedents, provides vigorous protections against unauthorized use of a celebrity's identity. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, it is crucial for both brands and celebrities to be aware of their rights and obligations to ensure a fair and just marketplace.