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
Codible Ventures LLP , marking a big step in the protection of artists’ personalityrights against the unauthorised use of their voices by artificial intelligence (AI) tools. Second , in different places, the Court has used the language “Personalityrights and right to publicity”.
AI, a simulation of human intelligence by a computer system designed to perform tasks typically done by human beings, has in just a few short years evolved beyond what was previously believed possible, and has manifested itself in even creating new works of IntellectualProperty, such as art, literature, music, etc.
Codible Ventures LLP that has initiated a judicial discussion on the protection of artists’ personalityrights against the unauthorised use of their voices by AI tools. Moreover, both in the EU and the US, privacy laws also come into play alongside intellectualproperty protections.
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.
This Kat is pleased to review the “ Overlapping IntellectualPropertyrights ”, edited by Neil Wilkof [full disclosure: a member of the IPKat team], Shamnad Basheer, and Irene Calboli (OUP, 2023, 864 pp.). The analysis is offered from the US, the UK, and the EU perspectives.
Recent court decisions have clarified the scope of copyright in film screenplays, personalityrights, and underlying works concerning content creation and licensing in broadcasting. and undoubtedly creating such content includes the distribution of any intellectualpropertyrights to their respective authors.
Explaining why and how such seemingly innocuous posts infringe on the shooter’s personalityrights, we are pleased to bring to our readers this post by SpicyIP intern Tejas Misra. PersonalityRights: Publicity or Privacy? It can include their face, voice, characteristics and distinctive qualities or attributes.
Cable, Video & Music Piracies The illegal production and sale of videos/movies are referred to as video piracy. Cable Piracy is the illegal transmission of films via a cable network, whereas Music Piracy is the illegal recording and sale of music. However, the industry is still dealing with a slew of legal issues daily.
In a guest post , Satchit Bhogle covered the issue of infringement of personalityrights. It is noted that the test for identifying infringement of personalityrights is to check whether there has been unauthorised use of identity for commercial gain and if there is a likelihood of confusion. and held that Google Inc.
Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School, enrolled in Professor David Vaver’s 2021-2022 IntellectualProperty Law & Technology Intensive Program. The etymology of the word may make sense, but can the same image be copied over and over without intellectualproperty repercussions? Shayna Jan is a 3L J.D. According to s.3(1)
on 7 February, 2025 (Delhi High Court) Image from here In a trademark and personalityrights infringement suit, the plaintiffs, Sir Ratan Tata Trust and Tata Sons, sought relief against the defendants for unauthorized use of the well-known trademarks TATA and TATA TRUSTS, as well as the well-known personal name and image of Late Ratan N.
Music vector created by macrovector. Unfortunately, in India, there is no specific legislation which protects the intellectualpropertyrights of celebrities. PersonalityRights. Indian courts have over time recognized personalityrights of celebrities in different judgments.
Almost every facet of the sports industry is now being tapped into and marketed and IntellectualProperty are valuable assets for these marketing tactics. Intellectualproperty is the asset that assists this commercialisation. Intellectualproperty, inherently, can be sold, licensed or marketed.
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.
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? However, Indian law has indirect references for the protection of publicity rights. Additionally, Sec.
She argues that the courts are restricting traders from revealing objective facts about a rival’s product under the guise of intellectualproperty 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.
The Supreme Court has again ruled on the protection of the personalityrights of deceased celebrities. Analyzed in conjunction with the previous Dalí judgment, this new ruling may introduce some uncertainty as to the post mortem scope of protection of such rights. Garrigues IntellectualProperty Department.
Highlights of the Week Announcing the 2024 Shamnad Basheer Essay Competition on IntellectualProperty Law Prof (Dr.) IPRS argued that Vodafone’s use of the sound recordings infringed the copyright of authors of the underlying literary and musical works. This and much more in last week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review.
[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.
The suit concerned agreements dating back to 2001 between IPRS and ENIL regarding broadcasting music in certain cities. When ENIL broadcast music in cities other than the ones in the agreement, IPRS filed an infringement suit. IntellectualProperty Appellate Board abolished through the Tribunals Reform Act, 2021.
Eastern India Motion Pictures Association it was held by the Supreme Court of India that a person composing music and lyrics will have the right of performing it in public for profit purposes and he cannot be refrained from doingso even if the that music or lyrics is a part of the cinematograph film and the film producer has a copyright in the same.
Trade Wings Hotels Limited on 24 January [Bombay High Court] In an important order concerning enforcement of copyright in sound recordings, the Bombay High Court held that copyright owners like Phonographic Performance Ltd and Novex can issue music licenses even if they are not registered as copyright societies under the Copyright Act.
Image from here [Part II] The Right to Publicity: 31 Years Since Madow’s Scathing Verdict, Yet…… The Show Must Go On? “It Protects Them From Exploitation” The Claim : Capitalizing on celebrities’ identity subjects their personalityrights to potential abuse and jeopardizes their career and livelihood.
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