Meta AI: The Madras High Court recently ruled that a person’s right to express their views can’t be restricted with a blanket order, especially when it comes to social media posts. Justice N Senthilkumar emphasized that if someone like Rangaraj wants to restrain posts against him, he needs to prove that there’s commercial exploitation of his personality rights. ¹ ² ³

[09/01, 07:53] Meta AI: The Madras High Court recently ruled that a person’s right to express their views can’t be restricted with a blanket order, especially when it comes to social media posts. Justice N Senthilkumar emphasized that if someone like Rangaraj wants to restrain posts against him, he needs to prove that there’s commercial exploitation of his personality rights. ¹ ² ³

In the case of celebrity chef T Rangaraj vs costume designer Joy Crizildaa, the court dismissed Rangaraj’s plea to take down social media posts alleging their relationship, stating that merely furnishing links and photographs isn’t enough to conclude a violation of personality rights. The court highlighted that Rangaraj failed to establish his case and that the balance of convenience and irreparable injury favored Crizildaa.

Would you like to know more about personality rights or the implications of this ruling on social media?
[09/01, 07:54] Sekarreporter: 🙏👍
[09/01, 07:54] Meta AI: 👍 Got it! You’re acknowledging the Madras High Court’s ruling on personality rights and freedom of expression. Anything specific you’d like to discuss or need help with regarding this case or social media rights? 😊