Remove Blogging Remove Contracts Remove Moral Rights Remove Social Media
article thumbnail

The Rise of Influencer Marketing – Contractual Considerations

IP Tech Blog

This blog explores some considerations surrounding influencer marketing and highlights key aspects that should be addressed in contracts to ensure a mutually beneficial and legally compliant partnership. Any contract should therefore include language that ensures the influencer will comply with the applicable disclosure requirements.

article thumbnail

Growth of Virtual Youtubers and IP Complications

IIPRD

It varies from creating an alternate persona on a social media account to voicing an animated character in a movie. However, the conversation being considered as a contract between them was unclear regarding the IP rights. 6] NFTs as of today don’t provide the exclusive right to the owner to commercialise the artwork.

IP 52
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Taking the Mona Lisa Effect from Illusion to Reality: Enhancing the Museum Experience with Augmented and Virtual Reality

JIPEL Copyright Blog

The museum industry, it would seem, is taking note of technology’s growing role in its operations, particularly in regards to visitor engagement and staying relevant in a social media-driven society where declining visitation rates have only been exacerbated by the ongoing pandemic.

article thumbnail

Anil Kapoor Vs Simply Life India & Ors: An Unwavering Assurance In Safeguarding Personality Rights Against Ai

IP and Legal Filings

In between these problems came Delhi High Court’s judgement in favour of Anil Kapoor wanting to get personality rights. The plaintiff filed the defence of personality rights infringement based on the contract that allocated the personas to them. Ramkumar Jewellers [6] , the court seems to have utilised Section 17(b).

article thumbnail

A Look Back at India’s Top IP Developments of 2023

SpicyIP

The Court interpreted the clause on ownership of work made during a contract of service (Section 17(c)) to not apply in situations where there is a contract between equals. The Court limited the scope of Section 17(c) to apply to contracts where the relationship between the parties is akin to that of an apprenticeship.

IP 124