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
The proliferation of deepfake technology has posed significant challenges to the protection of individual identity and reputation and the recent incidents of INDIA TV and Medanta hospitals trademark infringement and deepfaked potrayals have once again re-surfaced this issue.
This obligation serves as a check against arbitrary exercise of judicial power, which is in line with Article 14 of the Constitution and the principles of natural justice. As a result, interim orders in trademark infringement cases have become somewhat standardized. In Gautam Gambhir v. D.A.P & Co. &
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.
When AI relies on extensive datasets, questions around the ownership, control, and protection of both personal and IP-related data become critical. This article delves into these aspects in detail, exploring the nuanced intersections of data privacy and intellectual property within AI. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu.
Neela Film”), issued an ex-parte ad-interim injunction against the defendants, including websites, e-commerce platforms, YouTube channels and ‘John Doe’ parties, restraining them from infringing the copyright and trademark of the makers of the popular Hindi television sitcom “Taarak Mehta Ka Oolta Chashma” (“TMKOC”).
Comparing the approaches of the Courts vis a vis personalityrights and the right to livelihood, we are pleased to bring to you this guest post by Aditya Bhargava. Comparing the approaches of the Courts vis a vis personalityrights and the right to livelihood, we are pleased to bring to you this guest post by Aditya Bhargava.
In the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, which came into effect as of January 1, 2021, “personalityrights” has become a major highlight for its independent codification. As a result, the protection of human dignity and personalityrights has been further strengthened. By: Linda Liu & Partners
The article endorses an intellectual property approach to understand the right and its infringement. This is achieved by understanding the parallels between publicity right and trademark law. Throughout the article, the author derives insights from US case laws which have had a considerable influence on Indian courts.
this article ) and is now generating truckloads of cash for many lawyers. If you’re selling your personalityrights, make sure you understand the implications!!! Newspaper Can Talk About “Derby Pies” Without Infringing Trademarks–Rupp v. ” Unfortunately, that relationship did not go well. Esquared Hosp. ,
Introduction There is no exact legislation in India concerning regulating the publicity rights of a sports athlete. Through various proceedings from the Court of law, Publicity rights are inherent in Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. [i] iv] The Copyrights Act, 1957. [v]
We have come across many instances where Indian celebrities have registered their names and/or their signatures as a trademark. Accordingly, any unauthorized use of any kind of logo or symbol associated with any event, can make a case of trademark infringement. PersonalityRights. Tata Tea Ltd (CS no.
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.
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.
Recently, Bollywood Director Karan Johar [1] filed a case against the makers of “Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar” for using his name in the title of their movie without permission, this lawsuit has sparked again the debate relating to personalityrights in India. Topps Chewing Gum Inc. [2] Rajagopal v.
Every day we come across many such influencers and celebrities endorsing products wherein the personality of an individual is traded either by validation or without. Living in an era where influential personalities are reverenced, fortifying PersonalityRights from any such misuse is a must. PERSONALITYRIGHT.
Recently, Amitabh Bachchan’s voice and his image had been used by various persons for commercial purposes without his consent. Since he is a well-known person and has publicity rights attached to his name and photographs, the infringers faced legal action. What are Publicity Rights? Under this Act, Sec.
We also came across the Delhi High Court orders on the interplay between the Patents Act and the Competition Act, and on the inheritability of personalityrights. Case Summaries Calcutta High Court restrains the defendant from infringing the unregistered trademark of the respondent Case: Usco S.P.A. Drop us a comment below!
Fantasy Sports and Trademarks. One of the most glaring problems that trademark owners of high-profile sporting leagues and sports teams face today is the piracy of their trademarks. In addition to trademarks, the players are entitled to certain rights which are covered under the arena of ‘publicity rights’.
She argues that the courts are restricting traders from revealing objective facts about a rival’s product under the guise of intellectual property protection, which is open to constitutional scrutiny since the advertisements can only be restricted under Article 19(2) whereas the right to free speech under Article 19(1) extends to commercial speech.
Here is our recap of last weeks top IP developments including summaries of the posts on Delhi HCs ruling on Celebrity Rights and the Powers of Regional Directors under Companies Act vis a vis Trademark Similarity. The Delhi HC restrained the defendants in both cases from infringing the plaintiffs personalityrights.
Here's what Jakub writes: Artificial Intelligence and (hopefully) the death of copyright by Jakub Wyczik* Last year, I wrote an article about how copyright law relates to creations generated by AI. In my opinion, there has never been any talk of such works, because that would be the same as talking about non-distinctive trademarks.
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.
We’ve tried to represent a diversity of subject matter also in this list, so we have a fair sprinkling of cases dealing with copyright, patents, trademarks, competition law etc. The case clarifies that the bar on arbitrability of trademark disputes is not an absolute one. Golden Tobacco Ltd [Delhi High Court]. Jorawer Singh Mundy v.
Regarding personalityrights and introducing a public interest test before granting protection to celebrities, Rebecca Cardoso, in this guest post, advocates for a balanced approach prioritizing protection against genuine harm instead of trivial grievances. Navigating PersonalityRights Does Fame Have a Trade-Off?
Alleging infringement of his moral rights, misappropriation of his personalityrights, defamation, unfair competition, and passing off, Manchu filed the present suit seeking directions from the Court to take down the content by these Youtubers and John Doe(s).
This article will delve into the key copyright challenges associated with NFTs and their implications for the creative industry. The issue involved in the case was whether the use of names and images of sportspersons to create digital player cards is a violation of their privacy and publicity rights.
Highlights of the Week Initial Interest Confusion Clash: Forest Essentials Battles Baby Forest at the DHC Image from here Is it still trademark infringement if confusion regarding similar marks doesn’t carry on through to the completion of a transaction? Drop a comment below to let us know. Under Armour v.
This article is divided into two parts. The first part of this article explained the meaning of publicity rights and delved into the facet of legal recognition of publicity rights in jurisdictions other than India. First Part Right of Publicity Published on Mondaq. Puttaswamy (retd.) Union of India and Ors.
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.
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