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
Introduction Personalityrights 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.
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.
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 personalityrights has become a growing problem in India due to deepfakes, morphed pictures, etc. Interesting right? Puttaswamy v.
[Image Sources: Shutterstock] The courts have interpreted the other rights in the Constitution to give rise to a (limited) right to privacy through a number of rulings over the years, principally through Article 21 – the right to life and liberty. 2017 Justice K.S. Kheharon in the case of Justice K.S.
This agreement ended in 2017 and the plaintiff called upon the defendant to renew the franchisee agreement till the end of 2018. The plaintiff company had registered the marks ‘BACHPAN’ & ‘BACHPAN… a Play School’ either as a word mark, label or device.
On the topic of unauthorized use of a celebrity’s image, readers might recall the IPKat post covering the high-profile Michael Jordan case in China in 2017. There’s a threshold with regard to the right of likeness protection somewhere here, but the question is: where exactly? Couldn’t it be another basketball player?
They applied for registration of ‘Porcelaine de Limoges’ on 8th of June 2017. GI registration was granted by the French IP Office (INPI) on 1st of December 2017. In parallel, an unnamed person (‘defendant’) registered the domain name ‘porcelainefrancaisedelimoges.fr’ (‘French porcelain from Limoges.fr’).
On top of that, as the case demonstrates, the public domain may receive other threats from an aggressive extension of the scope of personalityrights. 2] Tribunale di Palermo, decided on September 15, 2017 and published on September 21, 2017. [3] 15 B.C.). 4] Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale (T.A.R.)
Just a few days after CNIL , however, the CJEU ruled once again on the territorial scope of injunctions relating to the protection of rights online. It did so in Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Ireland. Let’s see what happened and how the Supreme Court did reason.
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.
Shortly after onboarding in early 2017, Kevin joined the Census Bureau’s Rainbow Alliance affinity group. Its mission is to make the workplace more inclusive and supportive of people of different sexual orientations and gender identities, as well as advancing LGBTQIA+ civil rights.
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.
[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 personalityrights. Sarl a A Sarogi , where the Court affirmed the position on descendability of publicity rights.
on 15 May, 2024 (Delhi High Court) Image from here The present suit was filed by the plaintiff, a Hindi film actor, alleging infringement of his personalityrights, trademarks, and copyright by different defendants. The Peppy Stores & Ors. Haas F1 sues former team principal Gunther Steiner for trademark infringement.
T Series And Another vs M/S Dreamline Reality Movies on 22 February [Punjab and Haryana High Court] The case concerned the adaptation of late Jaswinder Kaurs biography into a cinematographic film and deals with interplay of copyright with personalityrights. The Rules are aimed at amending the Trade Marks Rules, 2017.
Right To Publicity- A Constitutional Right The right of publicity stems from the right of privacy. But right to privacy only came to be recognised as a fundamental right in the year 2017 in the case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (retd.) Union of India and Ors. Nonetheless, in R. Rajagopal v.
Voice Clones and Legal Tones: The Intersection of Artificial Intelligence and Posthumous PersonalityRights Bringing the dead back from their grave? Md Sabeeh Ahmad shares his review of the book below. Consequently, the Court upheld the decision to proceed with the suit without mediation. AR Bela Agrawal v.
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