Priti Zeta has sought an injunction from the Bombay High Court to restrain the circulation of AI-generated deepfake videos, morphed images and other unauthorized digital content depicting her. The case has been filed as “Preity Zinta v. Google LLC & Ors.”When the matter came up on July 3, Justice Madhav Jamdar said he would issue an order on July 6 after directing both parties to work out a practical mechanism to remove the allegedly infringing content from the online platform.In her lawsuit, Zinta named several intermediaries as defendants, including Google and Meta, as well as domain name registrars and certain identified infringers. She claims that AI-generated deepfake videos, manipulated images and chatbot-like interactions depicting her are being hosted on various online platforms. Senior advocate Venkatesh Dhond, appearing in court at Zinta, said AI-generated deepfakes were becoming increasingly sophisticated. He urged the court to grant urgent ex parte relief and direct the identified websites and intermediaries to immediately remove all infringing materials mentioned in the complaint.Dhond further requested a John Doe order against the unidentified infringers and sought a broader injunction restricting everyone from publishing or distributing unauthorized AI-generated content featuring Zinta.Lawyers representing Google and Meta told the court that they had no objection to removing URLs containing deviant or obscene material identified by the plaintiffs. However, they object to any blanket directive requiring intermediaries to proactively monitor or remove content that may not be infringing. They also argued that some of the URLs flagged in the lawsuit did not contain objectionable material.One domain name registrar said its role is limited to registering domain names and it has no control over URLs that direct users to content hosted on social media platforms.Justice Jamdar noted that any relief granted by the court must be carefully designed to ensure that the objectionable content is removed without affecting legitimate online material. While expressing the view that the case requires protective relief, the judge directed the parties to collaborate on a workable agreement that would facilitate the removal of truly infringing content while protecting legitimate content. The matter is scheduled to be heard again on July 6.