2017 Advertising Personality Rights 
IP and Legal Filings
APRIL 19, 2023
Introduction Personality rights refer to a person’s ability to safeguard his or her identity in the context of a property or privacy right. Celebrities value these rights since their names, images, or even voices may be inappropriately used in commercials by various businesses to increase sales. Puttaswamy v.
SpicyIP
DECEMBER 23, 2024
Marico had sought injunction on Alpinos advertisement alleging generic disparagement of oats. This agreement ended in 2017 and the plaintiff called upon the defendant to renew the franchisee agreement till the end of 2018. Alpino and Generic Disparagement: Alpino seeks vacation of ex-parte injunction alleging suppression of facts.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Kluwer Copyright Blog
APRIL 5, 2023
One of the most recent examples is the dispute (not yet decided) around the use of the images of the Birth of Venus by Michelangelo in fashion design; the others are the controversy over the use in the advertising of the image of the Teatro Massimo in Palermo [2] and the multiple claims against the use in the marketing of David by Donatello. [3]
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? 2017), a restaurant was using a tagline called ‘by Gautam Gambhir’ without any authorization.
SpicyIP
MARCH 9, 2025
Later, he discovered the trademark had expired since 2002 without prior notice, violating Rule 58(3) of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017. Though he applied in 1992, registration was granted only in 2020. Citing Jaisuryas Retail Ventures v.
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.
SpicyIP
MAY 20, 2024
The defendant claimed defence under comparative advertising, that it does lead to disparagement and that the plaintiff does not hold registration over the blue colour in question. The plaintiff claimed that their blue coloured product trade dress is iconic and distinctive and Nivea is a well-known trademark. The Peppy Stores & Ors.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
98 
Let's personalize your content