Your Face, Voice and Identity Have Rights Too

What are personality and publicity rights?

Your name, face, voice, likeness and other recognisable features can identify you to an audience. In India, courts have protected people against certain unauthorised uses of these features, particularly where the use exploits their identity commercially or falsely suggests that they endorse something.

These protections are often discussed as personality rights and publicity rights. They have developed through court decisions alongside privacy and other legal rights; there is no single rule that makes every mention, photograph or imitation unlawful. The person’s identity, the context and the effect of the use matter.

Isn’t this just a copyright issue?

Copyright and identity rights answer different questions.

Suppose a photographer takes your portrait. The photographer or another rights holder may control copyright in the photograph. But that does not automatically settle whether a business can put your face on a product advertisement and make viewers think you support it.

A creator using that portrait for a campaign should therefore check both sides: Who can license the photograph? And has the person pictured agreed to this use of their identity? Permission for one does not necessarily cover the other.

Can you show or discuss someone without their permission?

Yes, in appropriate circumstances. A person’s appearance in a news report, genuine criticism or authentic satire raises different issues from using that person to sell a product. The Delhi High Court has recognised the importance of news, satire, parody and genuine criticism when discussing personality rights.

The clearest warning sign is false association. For example, placing a creator’s face beside “My favourite investment app” in a paid promotion may lead viewers to believe the creator approved the campaign. The fact that their photograph was publicly available does not establish that they agreed to endorse the app.

What if the face or voice was made with AI?

Using AI to imitate a person does not remove the identity concern. A convincing voice clone or altered video can make viewers believe someone said or endorsed something they never did. Indian courts have considered cases involving such impersonation, and India’s 2026 rules also address certain realistic synthetic content on online platforms.

For a collaboration, be specific when asking for consent. Permission to use a creator’s existing video should not be assumed to include permission to generate new dialogue in their voice, change their facial expressions or reuse their likeness in future ads.

What if someone misuses your identity?

First, preserve the evidence: save the post, advertisement or listing, its URL, screenshots, the account name and the date you found it. Keep records showing that it is your image or voice and, where relevant, that you did not approve the claimed endorsement.

You can report impersonation or misuse through the platform and ask the advertiser or account to stop. For a campaign, a deceptive AI video or repeated commercial misuse, seek advice on the notice or legal remedy that fits the facts.

Before you post: a practical identity check

1. Who is identifiable? Look beyond the photograph to a person’s voice, name or distinctive likeness.
2. What will viewers understand? Could the post imply that the person endorses, works with or approved a brand?
3. What was agreed? Check the platforms, campaign, edits, duration and any use of AI.
4. Are there separate rights? Clear rights in the photograph or video as well as any necessary permission from the person depicted.
5. Keep the agreement. Save what the person and the content rights holder actually authorised.

The simple rule: Being allowed to use a piece of content does not automatically mean you may use the person in it as the face or voice of your campaign.

Sources and further reading

1. Supreme Court of India, Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India — the constitutional recognition of privacy, dignity and individual autonomy. 
2. Delhi High Court, Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India, order dated 20 September 2023 — addresses false endorsement, commercial misuse of identity and the place of news, satire and genuine criticism. 
3. Delhi High Court, Aishwarya Rai Bachchan v. Aishwaryaworld.com, order dated 9 September 2025 — discusses protection against unauthorised exploitation of a person’s image, name and likeness. 
4. Delhi High Court order dated 30 March 2026 concerning AI impersonation — considers allegations involving fabricated voice, image and apparent endorsement. 
5. MeitY: Frequently Asked Questions on the 2026 synthetic-content rules — explains when realistic AI-generated images, videos and voice clones fall within the rules. 

Disclaimer: This article provides general information for creators in India. The position may depend on the content, agreement, platform and current rules. For a specific notice, campaign or dispute, ask a question on GetHelp24 or speak with an independent legal professional.