Sadhguru Moves Delhi High Court Against Infringement Of Personality Rights By Rogue Websites, Use Of AI

Jagadish Vasudev popularly known as Sadhguru moved the Delhi High Court on Friday (May 30) in a suit seeking protection against infringement of his personality rights by rogue websites through the use of Artificial Intelligence. 

The counsel appearing for Sadhguru submitted before Justice Saurabh Banerjee that Sadhguru's name and likeness is being used by rogue websites to sell products. 

He said that Sadhguru is renowned and revered figure and a house hold name in India, arguing that this was a case where the plaintiff's name was being completely commercially misued. He said that Sadhguru is a padma vibhushan awardee. He said that through the use of AI Sadhguru's name was being misused. 

The counsel submitted that according to one of the defendant's Sadhguru "apparently made a disclosure" to a journalist as to how he made "so much money"; which he argued was done to divert traffic to what is called 'Trendastic Prism'–an investment platformall through the use of AI. He said that an newspaper article was "conjured" which allegedly said that "Fans advocate for Sadhguru's release after controversial interview".

"All this did not happen. It is all being conjured," the counsel said. He further said that idea was to divert traffic to this platform so that people will go invest therein. "This is commercial misuse of his persona leaving with me no choice," he said. 

"Relying on my good name products are being sold-book called Garbh Yatra (on pregnancy) being sold with my image on it. Relying on my good name, public at large are following blindly...out and out case of fraud. They are all using AI," he argued with respect to another defendant. 

During the hearing the court asked whether all the articles/channels contain Sadhguru. "You are saying this link per say has only Sadhguru...what I suggest is that we incorporate all these, and those urls have to be provided to (intermediary)," the court orally said. 

 The counsel however submitted that if it is only the link, then tomorrow such infringement will crop up else where on some other link. 

Meanwhile the counsel appearing for Google submitted that when the affected party writes to the intermediary reporting the concerned URL, it is then that the intermediary takes action.

She submitted that obligation is on plaintiff and he cant say that remove even legitimate content. The court said that it is passing an order on prima facie consideration. The court however orally said that when it comes to rogue website it can always exceed to a dynamic plus injunction which is the only method and means available.

"Its not a proactive mechanism, where I filter. He can report to me the URL, if I find that this is a genuine one I take it down. But If I have some doubt I inform him and he comes back to court and take clarity," the counsel for Google said.

The court thereafter orally said,"If the blockage has to be there of the rogue website per say...but as you are contending before this court you have to write it to them...This is not a fact finding authority. Im passing an order. You do on the basis of whatever is coming at your end. You write to them and get it cleared".

After hearing the parties for some time, the Court said it will pass an order which will be uploaded. 

Case title: SADHGURU JAGADISH VASUDEV & ANR. V/s IGOR ISAKOV & ORS.