IP and Legal Filings

JUNE 29, 2024

However, this article will discuss the reasoning of the court with respect to relief claimed by the Plaintiff against a creator of a YouTube video who compiled the interviews of the plaintiff and depicted his personality as ‘thug life’ The plaintiff contended that such videos portrayed him in a derogatory manner. million views.

Personality Rights 98

Personality Rights Fair Use Privacy Intellectual Property Law 98

Intepat

MAY 16, 2023

Due to the extent of unlawful activity associated with the petitioner’s name and personality, the court granted a restraining order on 25 th November 2022 against various people and companies. What are Publicity Rights? For instance, in Titan Industries Ltd.

Branding 98

Branding Brands Branding Personality Rights 98

SpicyIP

MARCH 9, 2025

Case Summaries Abbott Healthcare Private Limited vs Vinsac Pharma on 17 February, 2025 (Delhi High Court) Abbott Healthcare sued two defendants for trademark and copyright infringement, claiming they deceptively copied its well-known LIMCEE Vitamin C tablets by selling LIMEECEE with similar packaging.

Trademark 59

Trademark Patent Copyright Patent Application 59

Intepat

SEPTEMBER 27, 2024

While copyright is distinct from other forms of intellectual property by focusing on personal rights, its primary role is to manage and protect knowledge. Everything was going well until 2012 when University Press, Cambridge University Press (UK), and Taylor & Francis Group (UK), as well as Cambridge University Press India Pvt.

Intellectual Property 52

Intellectual Property Publishing Copyright Law Copyright 52

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

MAY 20, 2024

The Court ruled that the defendants have tried to slavishly copy the plaintiffs’ trademark by adopting a visually, structurally and phonetically similar trademark. It’s alleged that the defendant’s deceptively similar mark is also used in its websites for their products which have attracted negative reviews and comments.

Trademark 45

Trademark Advertising Advertising Invention 45