内容来源：https://www.livemint.com/ai/artificial-intelligence/bollywood-stars-sue-youtube-ai-deepfake-identity-protection-personality-right-11759461604581.html

内容总结：

【深度解析】AI换脸侵权风波席卷宝莱坞 网络平台责任边界引发法律激辩

随着人工智能技术迅猛发展，声音与面容的数字化克隆正引发新型法律争端。近日印度德里高等法院受理的多起宝莱坞明星维权案，将在线视频平台YouTube推至舆论风口浪尖，这场关乎数字身份保护的司法博弈，正在重新定义网络时代的肖像权保护边界。

一、明星集体诉讼捍卫数字人格权
宝莱坞知名影星阿布舍克·巴赫尚与艾西瓦娅·雷近日向德里高等法院提起诉讼，要求制止多个网站及YouTube频道未经授权商业化使用其姓名、肖像、声音等身份特征。法院在裁决中明确指出："对原告人格权的任何侵害，都将削弱其多年积累的声誉与公信力，并导致公众对产品服务关联性产生误判。"

这场维权行动并非孤例。包括阿米特巴·巴赫尚、杰基·史洛夫在内的多位影星近年均通过法律途径成功获得禁令保护，凸显出印度演艺界对AI技术滥用的集体警觉。

二、平台政策陷入法律争议漩涡
本案争议焦点集中于YouTube的"内容及第三方训练政策"。原告方指出，该政策允许创作者授权将视频用于AI模型训练，可能助长针对公众人物的偏见性描绘。更严重的是，侵权方通过YouTube频道上传侵权内容非法牟利，据诉讼文件显示，巴赫尚家族就此索赔高达4000万卢比。

诉状要求法院责令YouTube建立防护机制，防止侵权视频用于AI训练，并强调平台需对匿名侵权者信息进行披露。截至发稿前，YouTube方面未对相关质询作出回应。

三、司法实践构建平台责任新范式
近年来YouTube在印度频陷类似诉讼。2025年TV今日网络诉谷歌案中，法院责令删除冒充知名记者的伪造频道；2024年曼楚·维什努案则创下先例，要求平台48小时内下架侵权内容并披露匿名侵权者信息。这些判例正在形成针对AI侵权的司法应对体系。

四、法律框架面临技术革新挑战
专家指出，当前争议核心在于网络平台"中介责任"与"安全港原则"的适用边界。辛格尼亚律师事务所管理合伙人罗希特·贾恩认为，若平台履行法定尽职调查义务，或可避免直接责任。而阿克德·朱里斯事务所阿莱·里兹维指出，虽然印度未对人格权单独立法，但法院正通过宪法第21条隐私权条款与普通法公开原则予以保护。

巴胡古纳法律事务所安基特·拉杰加里亚强调，随着社交媒体与AI技术革命性发展，姓名、肖像、声音等人格要素的商业化滥用激增，迫使公众人物不得不通过司法途径维护权益。这场科技与法律的碰撞，正在重塑数字时代的权利平衡格局。

中文翻译：

印报解读 | AI深度伪造泛滥：宝莱坞维权之战对网络平台意味着什么。随着人工智能模型开始能够克隆声音和面容，法庭正成为名人维护自身形象的战场，这也引发了关于数字权利和平台责任的更广泛讨论。

对个人形象的控制权争夺已从狗仔队的镜头转向人工智能算法的战场。随着深度伪造和AI生成的名人模仿内容扩散，YouTube等网络平台可能面临越来越多关于人格权的诉讼。人格权涵盖个人姓名、声音、相貌、形象等独特属性，赋予人们控制自身身份商业使用的权利。在人工智能兴起的当下，这些权利正受到前所未有的关注。

宝莱坞演员提起的诉讼将这一问题推向风口浪尖，凸显出当明星们竭力维护数字身份与声誉时，像YouTube这样的平台如何被卷入法律纠纷。本文将深入解析名人诉诸法庭的缘由及其索赔诉求。

为何宝莱坞演员要向法院提起人格权诉讼？
宝莱坞影星阿布舍克·巴强与艾西瓦娅·雷·巴强近日向德里高等法院提起诉讼，要求阻止其人格权遭滥用。他们要求对包括YouTube频道在内的侵权网站发布禁令，这些网站未经许可将其姓名、形象、声音及肖像用于商业用途。

法院在裁定中指出："原告人格权受侵害将导致其多年积累的声誉与商誉受损，同时会造成公众对产品或服务是否获得原告授权或代言的混淆。"此前，阿米达普·巴强、杰基·什罗夫、阿尼尔·卡普尔等著名演员也通过类似诉讼获得了禁令。

截至发稿前，向YouTube发出的问询仍未获回复。

巴强家族为何向YouTube索赔？
诉状中指出YouTube的"内容与第三方训练政策"存在隐患，该政策允许创作者授权将其视频用于AI模型训练。原告认为这可能导致偏见或篡改内容用于AI训练，放大对个人的负面或虚假刻画。诉状特别强调："更恶劣的是，侵权者正通过YouTube频道上传内容非法牟利。"

为此，巴强家族要求法院责令YouTube不得使用侵权视频训练AI，并部署防护机制确保侵权内容不用于AI训练。他们以经济损失为由，索赔4000万卢比。

YouTube还面临哪些类似诉讼？
近年来YouTube频涉相关纠纷：
• 电视今日网络诉谷歌案（2025年）：德里高院责令谷歌删除冒充记者安贾娜·奥姆·卡什亚普的伪造YouTube频道，该频道使用篡改视频与深度伪造内容。
• 曼丘·维什努案（2024年）：法院颁布禁令要求YouTube在被告未配合时48小时内下架侵权内容，并责令平台提供匿名侵权者身份信息。

法律专家作何解读？
法律专家指出这些案件判决将为AI时代网络平台责任确立关键先例。

Singhania律所管理合伙人罗希特·贾因表示："印度法律中，YouTube这类平台对用户上传侵权内容的责任认定存在微妙平衡，主要依据'中介责任'与'安全港'原则。若平台履行法定尽职调查义务，或可免于直接担责。"

Accord Juris管理合伙人阿拉伊·里兹维指出，虽然人格权未成文化，但法院通过宪法第21条（隐私权）与普通法宣传原则予以保障。当前司法实践日益将姓名、形象、肖像视为商业资产，快速核发禁令、下架令与赔偿裁定。

Bahuguna律所指定合伙人安基特·拉吉加里亚强调："随着社交媒体与AI技术革命性扩张，姓名、形象、声音等人格权滥用现象激增。这不仅促使名人积极维权，更迫使他们不得不通过诉讼应对侵权行为。"

英文来源：

Mint Explainer | AI deepfakes are everywhere: What Bollywood's fight means for online platforms
With AI models now able to clone voices and faces, courts are becoming the battleground for celebrities seeking to safeguard their image, raising broader questions about digital rights and platform liability
The battle to control one's image has moved from the paparazzi lens to the artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm.
Online platforms such as YouTube may increasingly face litigation over personality rights, particularly as deepfakes and AI-generated impersonations of celebrities spread. Personality rights—covering an individual’s name, voice, likeness, image, and other distinctive attributes—give people control over the commercial use of their identity. With the rise of AI, these rights are under sharper focus than ever.
Petitions filed by Bollywood actors have pushed the issue to the forefront, highlighting how platforms like YouTube could be drawn into court battles as stars seek to protect their digital identity and reputation. Mint takes a closer look at why celebrities are moving courts, and why they are demanding damages.
Why have Bollywood actors filed personality rights cases in courts?
Bollywood actors Abhishek Bachchan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan recently approached the Delhi High Court, seeking to prevent the misuse of their personality rights. They sought injunctions against certain rogue websites, including YouTube channels, that used their names, images, voices, and likenesses for commercial purposes without consent.
Granting them relief, the court observed: “Any infringement of the plaintiff’s personality rights will lead to dilution of his reputation and goodwill that he has garnered over the years, while also causing confusion amongst members of the public regarding the authenticity, endorsement or sponsorship of a product or service by the plaintiff."
Other prominent actors, including Amitabh Bachchan, Jackie Shroff, and Anil Kapoor, have previously moved courts in similar cases, and have also secured injunctions.
Queries sent last evening to YouTube remained unanswered till publishing.
Why are the Bachchans seeking damages from YouTube?
In their petitions, the Bachchans flagged YouTube’s “your content and third-party training policy", which allows creators to permit their videos to be used for training AI models. The couple argued this could allow biased or manipulated content to train AI systems, amplifying negative or false portrayals of individuals.
The petition further noted: “What is more egregious is that the infringers (defendants) are also making commercial gains through content being uploaded on YouTube channels."
Accordingly, the Bachchans have sought a court order directing YouTube not to use infringing videos uploaded by unknown websites to train AI models. They also want YouTube to deploy safeguards to ensure that content violating intellectual property rights is not used for AI training. Citing monetary losses, they have demanded damages of nearly ₹4 crore.
What other litigations has YouTube faced?
YouTube has faced similar litigation in recent years.
TV Today Network vs Google LLC (2025): In June, the Delhi High Court ordered Google LLC to remove a fake YouTube channel impersonating journalist Anjana Om Kashyap, which used manipulated videos and deepfake content.
Manchu Vishnu case (2024): The actor sued several YouTube channels for unauthorized use of his voice, image, and likeness in AI-manipulated videos. The court ordered injunctions, directed YouTube to take down infringing content within 48 hours if defendants failed to comply, and asked the platform to provide identifying details of anonymous infringers.
What are legal experts saying?
Legal experts note that the outcome of these cases could set crucial precedents for the liability of online platforms in the AI era.
“Under Indian law, the liability of an online platform like YouTube for infringing content uploaded by its users is a nuanced issue, primarily governed by ‘intermediary liability’ and the principle of ‘safe harbour,’" said Rohit Jain, managing partner, Singhania & Co.
"While YouTube may be impleaded as a party to personality rights litigation, if it has complied with due diligence and other requirements under law, the liability may not directly fall upon YouTube," Jain said.
Alay Rizvi, managing partner, Accord Juris, noted that while personality rights are not codified in India, courts uphold them through Article 21 (right to privacy) and common-law publicity principles. Increasingly, courts treat name, image, and likeness as proprietary commercial interests, granting swift injunctions, takedowns, and damages.
“With the revolutionary expansion of social media and AI technology, the misuse of personality rights such as name, image, voice and other attributes has grown. This has triggered a rise in disputes where celebrities are not only seeking protection of their rights but are also being forced to move courts against violations," said Ankit Rajgarhia, designate partner, Bahuguna Law Associates.