A sense of urgency surrounds the legal atmosphere in the Indian entertainment industry as veteran Bollywood actor Jackie Shroff has resorted to legal measures to defend his personal brand. The star has logged a complaint with the Delhi High Court, requesting judicial intervention to safeguard his personality and publicity rights, which have purportedly been infringed upon by various commercial entities.
Alleged unauthorized exploitation of Shroff’s name, photographs, voice, and notably, the colloquial term “Bhidu,” which has become synonymous with the actor, has led to this decisive legal action. Shroff’s plea emphasizes the preservation of the distinct components of his personal brand that resonate with his fans and the public at large. The widespread recognition associated with these elements makes unauthorized use by third parties not only misleading but also potentially damaging to Shroff’s reputation.
Justice Sanjeev Narula has acknowledged the gravity of the situation, issuing a summons in response to Shroff’s suit. A hearing has been scheduled for the following day to deliberate on the request for an interim injunction. At the core of the actor’s demand is a permanent injunction that would prevent the named defendants from utilizing the actor’s various personal attributes—including his renowned monikers such as ‘Jackie Shroff,” “Jackie,” “Jaggu Dada,” and “Bhidu”—for any form of commercial or personal advantage.
In an explicit legal call to action, the motion asks for a decree that would impede entities such as Bhidu Shawarma restaurant and relevant associates from infringing on Shroff’s registered trademark by using the moniker as part of their trade name or any other brands that could cause confusion due to their similarity with Shroff’s established trademarks.
This litigation also points to a perceived violation of Shroff’s moral rights pertinent to his cinematic performances, accorded under the provisions of section 38B of the Copyright Act, 1957. Given Shroff’s extensive portfolio in the film industry, his performances are entrenched not only in cinematic history but also in the hearts of his audience, granting him the right to restrain any third-party from altering or tarnishing his performances in a manner that could be detrimental to his public image.
A particular point of contention involves the creation and distribution of GIFs that leverage Shroff’s movie clips without his previous knowledge or approval. Such actions, the suit argues, not only sully his reputation but also expose him to unsavory humor, impinging on his moral rights.
Jackie Shroff’s case is symptomatic of a larger issue within the sphere of intellectual property rights and celebrity reputation management. The unauthorized commercialization of an individual’s persona can be seen as an infringement that must be met not just with the traditional understanding of publicity rights but also with the broader defense against the dilution or tarnishment of one’s brand.
The proceedings involving Jackie Shroff follow a succession of similar legal pursuits by prominent figures in the Indian film industry. Notably, in the previous year, famed actor Anil Kapoor won a similar reprieve from the Delhi High Court to prevent the unauthorized commercial use of his personality or name. Earlier, in 2022, the legendary Amitabh Bachchan also filed a suit with the Delhi High Court to combat illicit usage of his voice and image. These cases signal a growing trend amongst public figures to take a proactive stance in protecting their personal brands from unsanctioned exploitation, highlighting the critical balance between the right to publicity and the bounds of commercial enterprise.
