SpicyIP

MARCH 9, 2025

Subodh Chachra Proprietor Of M/S Expose vs V2 Promoters Pvt Ltd on 3 March, 2025 (Delhi District Court) the plaintiff, owner of the trademark “X’POSE” for apparel, sued the defendant for infringing and passing off its brand name in the hospitality sector through “XPOSE LOUNGE.”

Trademark 59

Trademark Patent Patent Application Copyright 59

IP and Legal Filings

FEBRUARY 20, 2024

ABSTRACT There has been a dramatic increase in the commercial use of celebrity personalities by people not authorized to do so compared to the earlier times. Protecting personality rights has become a growing problem in India due to deepfakes, morphed pictures, etc. Interesting right? Puttaswamy v.

Personality Rights 92

Personality Rights Privacy Social Media Intellectual Property 92

IP and Legal Filings

AUGUST 26, 2024

Recently, Bollywood Director Karan Johar [1] filed a case against the makers of “Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar” for using his name in the title of their movie without permission, this lawsuit has sparked again the debate relating to personality rights in India. Topps Chewing Gum Inc. [2] Rajagopal v.

Personality Rights 52

Personality Rights Privacy Intellectual Property Law Intellectual Property 52

Intepat

MAY 16, 2023

What are Publicity Rights? Publicity rights or personality rights are rights of an individual to control the commercial usage of their identities, such as name, image, voice, and any similar characteristics. For instance, in Titan Industries Ltd.

Brands 98

Brands Branding Branding Personality Rights 98

SpicyIP

MAY 20, 2024

Intergrow Brands Pvt. The Court further held that the 2012 amendment has radically changed legal framework pertaining to rights of authors and has granted right to claim royalties for every occasions where their work is communicated to the public. The Peppy Stores & Ors.

Trademark 45

Trademark Advertising Advertising Invention 45

SpicyIP

DECEMBER 30, 2023

[Delhi High Court] On September 20, the Delhi High Court granted relief to film actor Anil Kapoor against the unauthorised use of his image, name, voice, and other traits of his persona for monetary gain, reinforcing his personality rights. Sarl a A Sarogi , where the Court affirmed the position on descendability of publicity rights.

IP 124

IP Copyright Trademark Intellectual Property 124

SpicyIP

JANUARY 2, 2022

Both suits were filed before the 2012 amendment to the Copyright Act. Further, given that the 2012 amendment does not have a retrospective effect, the Court held that the amendment has no effect on the legal position. If a sub-brand performs the function, as Asava possibly does in this case, it must be treated as a trademark.

IP 143

IP Intellectual Property Trademark Copyright 143