This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Spadika Jayaraj discussed a case where the Delhi High Court dismissed a suit by a media house accusing copyright infringement on its database of users. The issue has often arisen in the context of protecting confidential information through copyrightlaw. E.g., see Prateek Surisetti’s post here and Niyati Prabhu’s post here.
Introduction Intellectual property laws are generally divided into industrial property and copyright. While copyright is distinct from other forms of intellectual property by focusing on personalrights, its primary role is to manage and protect knowledge.
International Variations: Similar rights exist in other countries, often referred to as “personalityrights” or “rights of persona.” Right of Publicity v First Amendment And, like copyright infringement, Right of Publicity is also subject to First Amendment defenses.
Several petitions in the Madras High Court challenged the validity of rule 29(4) of the Copyright Rules, 2013. The petitioner contented that Jayalalithaa’s personalityrights and her family’s privacy rights should be protected and that the productions may be incorrect and misleading. Saregama India Limited v.
Weve tried to represent a diversity of subject matter also in this list, so its a mixed bag of cases dealing with patents, trademarks, copyrightlaw etc. The decision by Punjab and Haryana High Court is also notable for explicitly stating that one needs to be a celebrity to be able to claim personalityrights.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content