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
1] And since, the creator, consumer and subject of the content are distinctly different-the potential lack of empathy or misapprehension by the consumers towards the subject, based on the creators potrayal, necessitate a discussion of the subjects privacy and personalityrights.
Image via Staatliche Museen, Berlin, Gemäldegalerie / Christoph Schmidt PublicDomain Mark 1.0 The human right to cultural participation has become a pillar of protecting and empowering individuals and communities.
In the Tribunale di Firenze’s decision, while the reference to the constitutional norm seems to represent a mere rhetorical exercise, the content of the exclusive right would be traceable in the provisions of the Cultural Heritage Code. In particular, under EU law the Italian public cultural property seems to be inconsistent with art.
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. The plaintiff further argued that he was the lawful successor to the personalityrights of the late actor. Her area of interest lies in IP and corporate law.
The Vidya Drolia case laid down certain conditions for non-arbitrability of disputes and stated that grant and issue of patents and registration of trademarks were exclusive sovereign or government functions, thus making them non-arbitrable. Olympic medalists and the right to publicity. Hero Electric Vehicles Private Ltd 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