In December 2025, Indian courts in New Delhi and Mumbai took up a new class of cases in which some of India's biggest names in film fight back against unauthorized deepfakes and AI-generated impersonations. Famous Indian actors Nandamuri Taraka Rama Rao (NTR Junior), R. Madhavan and Shilpa Shetty have petitioned for and won strong court orders aimed at stopping the spread of composite images, audio and videos imitating their likenesses.
Celebrities called for urgent assistance to stop the spread of AI-generated deepfakes, voice clones, and unauthorized digital products. Within just a few weeks, judges in Delhi and Mumbai passed orders in favor of celebrities. These stories highlight the global nature of AI risks and illustrate how challenges related to AI move across borders, industries, and platforms.
Generative AI and the risks of deepfakes
All three rulings recognize a central truth in today's AI era. In short, generative tools make it easier than ever to create convincing fakes, duplicate celebrities' images and voices, and commercialize digital likenesses without their consent. The lawsuit included not only obvious spoofing such as fake trailers and synthetic recommendations, but also more harmful attacks such as non-consensual and pornographic deepfakes.
The judges who heard these cases have made it clear that AI-generated content falls within the scope of misappropriation rights and remedies, regardless of how the content was created. These range from commercial use (T-shirts, posters, advertising, etc.) to non-commercial misuse that causes reputational damage. This approach frames AI risks as an extension of existing legal frameworks and is not absolved by novelty.
Platforms and intermediaries
Courts in these cases have strongly rejected hands-off approaches by e-commerce sites, hosts, registrars, and social networks. In the NTR Jr. case, the judge held that intermediaries must promptly remove AI-based impersonations, deepfakes, and synthetic content upon notification. The judge rejected the platform's defense on the grounds that it is a neutral host. In the Shilpa Shetty case, the judge ordered expedited takedown and “ordered all defendants to remove the URLs.” [containing deepfakes]…by the time this order is uploaded to the court's website.” In the R. Madhavan case, the defendant platform companies were further required to submit information, including IP addresses, about the users/accounts behind the illegal activity, reflecting growing expectations for the responsible management of digital risks. The ruling likely signals that Indian courts expect platforms and intermediaries to act quickly when they become aware of AI impersonation or synthetic media abuse.
expand the meaning of harm
Courts in these cases have awarded both economic and personal damages as a result of AI content. In the Shilpa Shetty case, the judge warned not only of the loss of advertising revenue, but also of the loss of control over one's image and the corrosive effects of AI-driven reputational attacks or “digital defamation,” especially for women, especially when synthetic, obscene, or defamatory content is created. He framed the risks of AI as a fundamental privacy rights issue, citing the rights to dignity, privacy, and even “digital personhood.” Similarly, the court in R. Madhavan's case noted that the misuse of name, image and likeness not only causes economic and reputational damage, but also undermines a person's goodwill, social status and psychological well-being. In the NTR Jr. case, the court also found that unauthorized commercial exploitation, whether through merchandise, impersonation, or AI-generated content, can result in irreparable damage to reputation and goodwill, expanding the types of damages that can be recognized.
The judgment suggests that India's established legal principles fully apply to synthetic and AI-generated content, and companies will need to assess where their reputations and rights intersect with emerging technologies.
What's next?
The global nature of AI means that no company or jurisdiction is immune to similar risks. These stories offer lessons for all organizations working with AI:
- AI supply chain – Organizations need to know what AI tools can create, where third-party models are deployed, and how synthetic content moves through the ecosystem.
- takedown protocol – As with classic intellectual property and privacy issues, companies should implement a playbook for rapid investigation and response to deepfake complaints.
- Platform and vendor policies – Terms of service, supplier agreements, and user conduct agreements should prohibit fraudulent AI impersonation and provide for prompt intervention.
As the lines between individual rights, technology, and reputation blur, organizations of all types are expected to keep pace as both regulators and courts take note of AI's power to create, reproduce, and disrupt. Although these judgments are in India, digital identity and reputational risk are global. Organizations must treat these issues as core components of their AI compliance and governance protocols.
