Chinese and English archive texts include AI-assisted translations, not independently human-reviewed. Consult the original-language sources alongside them.
Delhi High Court grants a permanent injunction against defendants 2, 4–10, 12 and 13. Proceedings continue against others; it also corrects the earlier direction for direct domain transfer.
What changed
Delhi High Court grants a permanent injunction against defendants 2, 4–10, 12 and 13. Proceedings continue against others; it also corrects the earlier direction for direct domain transfer.
Paragraphs 8–12 and 20–23. Do not describe the entire case as closed or all AI issues as finally decided. The AI-image issue involving defendant 15 awaits further hearing.
Editorial research question
Editorial interpretation: examine intersections between actors’ personality rights, generated images and voices, and traditional merchandising, alongside different defendants’ procedural paths.
This is an editorial interpretation or question, separate from factual statements.
Evidence & sources
Delhi High Court grants a permanent injunction against defendants 2, 4–10, 12 and 13. Proceedings continue against others; it also corrects the earlier direction for direct domain transfer.
SRC-0080CS(COMM)652/2023; paragraphs 7–12, 20 and 23
Delhi High Court / Republication by Indian Kanoon · EN · 2024-04-30
Case
Related documents
DOC-0068Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India — 30 April 2024 orderCite this record
ANTI-AI ARCHIVE. “Permanent injunction granted against some defendants in the Anil Kapoor case.” evt-0083. Include this page’s URL and your access date when citing.