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
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.
SpicyIP Tidbit: Mdecins Sans Frontires suit against Dharma Productions for Jigra scene Mdecins Sans Frontires (MSF) filed a suit against Dharma Productions for using its trademark in the movie Jigra. Read this Tidbit by Md Sabeeh Ahmad discussing MSFs averments and the potential trademark questions that may arise! A liability of Rs.
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. Read the post for more details.
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.
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.
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.
Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summaries of posts on the Law Commission’s Report on Trade Secrets and Economic Espionage, DHC’s decisions on working examples, writ jurisdiction of the pre-grant oppositions, and the Viagra-Vigoura trademark dispute. This and much more in last week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review.
We’ve tried to represent a diversity of subject matter also in this list, so it’s a mixed bag of cases dealing with patents, trademarks, copyright law etc. The Court delineated instances like parody and satire where free speech in the context of well-known persons may be protected. Bolt Technology v. First, in Toyota v.
Voice Clones and Legal Tones: The Intersection of Artificial Intelligence and Posthumous PersonalityRights Bringing the dead back from their grave? The suit was transferred to the Commercial Court, which granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in 2018, restraining the defendants from using the impugned trademarks.
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.
Weve tried to represent a diversity of subject matter also in this list, so its a mixed bag of cases dealing with patents, trademarks, copyright law 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