The Delhi High Court in a recent order while granting interim relief to Bollywood Actor Jackie Shorff restrained several social media accounts, e-commerce websites, Artificial Intelligence (AI) chat bots, etc. from misusing the actor’s name, voice or image for any commercial purpose without his consent. However, the court refused to grant any such relief to Shroff against Youtuber Mahesh Keshwala and tooka view that the term Thug-Life is not derogatory but a compliment as it is used in the video.
While granting relief to Shorff againt several social media accounts for allegedly infringing upon his personality and publicity rights by using his name, voice or image, the court refused to accept Shroff's argument that the use of word "Thug-Life" was derogatory and tarnished his reputation.
Thug-Life A Complimet
Counsel appearing for Shroff contended that words “Thug Life” mentioned is a phrase often associated with a rebellious or defiant attitude. He further argued that the sunglasses/caps/cigarettes/gold chains other animated images/gifs with the words “Thug Life” and other photoshopped elements, distorts Mr. Shroff’s persona and infringes upon his personality rights. He further objected to the monetisation through use of the said video, pointing out the whopping 1.3 million views that the infringing video has generated.
"The Court has reviewed the video titled “JACKIE SHROFF IS SAVAGE (*) JACKIE SHROFF THUG LIFE!” The term ‘Thug Life’ as explained on dictionary.com, is a slang term and defined as “Especially in Black hip-hop culture, thug life refers to a determined and resilient attitude
to succeed in life in spite of racism and injustice.” A basic search on the internet would reveal that the term ‘Thug Life’ is commonly used in rap music, social media, and youth slang to denote a tough, resourceful persona. In this context the term “savage” generally refers to someone who is perceived as tough, fearless, and unapologetically bold."
The court said that the term “Thug Life” is often featured in memes that portray individuals demonstrating boldness or audacity, always with an undertone of humour or defiance.
"The phrase is employed to highlight moments of cleverness or resistance, framing the individual as admirable rather than nefarious. In fact, a search of the term ‘thug life’ on YouTube would bring results of various such videos which prima facie indicate that the term is meant as a compliment and not a derogatory word. Given this understanding of the term, the video in question could arguably be viewed as a tribute to Mr. Shroff’s assertive demeanour," the order read.
The court took this prima facie view and said that Shroff's claim that the video tarnishes his reputation requires further scrutiny and it would like to hear the YouTuber's reponse before passing any further order on the same.
"The video compiles publicly available interview clips where Mr Shroff is portrayed with forthrightness and wit. The additions made by the creator— such as the ‘Thug Life’ caption and accompanying visual embellishments— are intended to underscore Mr. Shroff’s charismatic and assertive persona, aligning with the meme culture’s characteristic celebration of such traits. Therefore, Mr. Anand’s contention that the video casts Mr. Shroff in a derogatory light may not align with the broader, more contemporary understanding and use of the term ‘Thug Life’ in popular culture. The portrayal does not introduce any falsehoods; rather, it embellishes the existing public perception of Mr. Shroff as a formidable and commendable figure."
YouTubers Are A Growing Community, Blocking 'Thug-Life' Video Could Stifle Freedom Of Expression
The court further said YouTubers are a growing community, and the substantial viewership of these videos translate into significant revenue for the creators, underscoring that such content is not merely entertainment but also a vital source of livelihood for a considerable segment, particularly, the youth.
ALSO READ | VIAGRA Vs VIGOURA: Why Delhi HC Imposed Rs 3 Lakhs Fine On Homeopathic Drug Maker
"These videos represent a form of artistic expression that requires creators to engage thoughtfully with their content. This involves researching target demographics, curating videos anticipated to resonate with audiences, and editing a diverse array of available content into a cohesive and entertaining package. Consequently, this creative process can be seen as generating not only economic value but also employment opportunities for a significant number of young individuals."
The court said that restricting such creative expressions by enjoining the YouTuber from producing similar videos or blocking these videos might have far-reaching consequences for this vibrant community. "More critically, it could set a precedent that stifles freedom of
expression, potentially deterring the public from exercising their right to free speech due to fear of legal repercussions.
Bhidu A Trademark For Jackie Shroff
The Bollywood Actor had approached the high court seeking protection of his personality and public rights.
Shroff contended that he is also the registered proprietor of the trademark ‘BHIDU’ and “Bhidu ka khopcha” and his comercial endorsements leverage his personality, name, voice, image, likeness, mannerisms, gestures, and other uniquely identifiable characteristics associated with him.
Shroff's counsel argued that these attributes, over which Shroff exercises exclusive control, constitute his ‘personality rights’ and ‘publicity rights.’ And the unauthorised use of these characteristics for commercial purposes not only infringes upon these rights but also dilutes the brand equity painstakingly built by Shorff over the years.
"The name “JACKIE SHROFF,” being the personal name of the Plaintiff, is immediately and uniquely associated with him and no one else. This name carries substantial goodwill and an esteemed reputation, exclusively linked to the Plaintiff. Over the past 25 years, the Plaintiff has become a household name, not only in India but also globally. Apart from the above, it is contended that, the names ‘Jackie’, ‘Jaggu Dada’ and ‘Bhidu’ are associated exclusively with the Plaintiff and the unauthorised use of the same by third parties is likely to lead to confusion and deception," the counselcontended in court.