Actor Jackie Shroff has taken legal action to protect his unique persona by filing a petition with the Delhi HC. Shroff aims to prevent the unauthorised use of the term “Bhidu,” along with his name, photographs, and voice, highlighting the need for control over his public image and personality rights.

Petition Details

In his petition, Jackie Shroff seeks comprehensive legal safeguards to ensure that no one can use the term Bhidu without his explicit permission. This move also extends to his distinctive voice and images, which are often mimicked across various media platforms. The suit underscores the significance of protecting his personality and publicity rights, reflecting a broader trend among celebrities to maintain control over their personal brands.

Jackie Shroff moves Delhi HC to protect Bhidu

Implications for the Entertainment Industry

If Shroff’s petition is successful, it could have substantial repercussions for the entertainment industry. Artists and performers, particularly those who imitate Shroff’s well-known voice and gestures, may need to obtain formal consent before doing so. This case could set a precedent, influencing how celebrities’ rights are protected and how their personas are used in the media.

Krushna Abhishek and Mimicry Controversy

The legal action directly impacts entertainers like Krushna Abhishek, known for his impersonations of Jackie Shroff, especially his character Jaggu Dada. Abhishek’s mimicry has been a staple on shows like The Great Indian Kapil Show. The controversy around this mimicry has intensified following Shroff’s legal move, as it brings into question the future of such performances without explicit permission from the actor.

Also Read: Indian Actress Tabu to Star in ‘Dune: Prophecy’

Netizen Reactions

The move has sparked diverse reactions online. While some users on social media platforms argue that terms like Bhidu are part of the colloquial language of Mumbai streets and not exclusive to Jackie Shroff, others see the legal action as a prudent step in an era where deepfake technology can easily replicate voices and faces. The decision has also led to humorous and critical comments, with some users predicting adverse effects on performers like Krushna Abhishek, whose careers rely heavily on impersonations.

Public and Legal Opinions

Public opinion is divided. Critics argue that Shroff’s attempt to claim exclusive rights over a common term like Bhidu is overreaching, while others point out the necessity of such measures to protect celebrities’ identities in the digital age. Legal experts suggest that while Shroff can protect his photographs and original voice, stopping others from mimicking him might be more complex.

Jackie Shroff’s legal pursuit for protection against unauthorised use of his persona marks a significant moment in the discourse on celebrity rights. As the case unfolds, it will be crucial to observe how the legal system balances the protection of personal rights with the freedom of artistic expression.