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.
The development of Artificial Intelligence, from being able to create edited photos to now generating deepfake videos that cannot be distinguished from real videos, has created an imminent threat to intellectual property rights and personalityrights specifically. and includes both commercial and non-commercial aspects.
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.
With the greater increase of various leagues such as the IPL in cricket, or the NBA in basketball, various teams are formed by various individuals to assert a title in trademarks and copyrights, amongst other forms of IP so that profit can be maximised. Intellectual property, inherently, can be sold, licensed or marketed.
These events point to two prevalent issues within the current legal framework: First, that current intellectual property laws do not properly acknowledge collective ownership over shared culture within Indigenous communities and second, whether tattoo designs have the potential to be protected through copyright laws. Of note, in DRG Inc.
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.
When AI relies on extensive datasets, questions around the ownership, control, and protection of both personal and IP-related data become critical. AI’s capacity to generate content, inventions, and insights from this data intensifies concerns, not only about ownership but also about copyright and trade secrets.
Continuing our annual tradition of recounting the significant developments that impacted the Indian IP landscape in the year that has been, we bring you a round-up of 2021’s developments. This year, we have divided these developments into three categories: a) Top 10 IP Judgments/Orders (Topicality/Impact). Lectro E-Mobility.
However, its specific emphasis on protecting certain elements of the whole scheme of copyrighted content, such as fictional characters and the distinctive personas they embody, has been a focal point, contributing substantially to the discourse surrounding the ever-expanding ambit of copyrightability as well as personalityrights.
As 2023 comes to an end, in line with our annual tradition, we take stock of the top IP developments that occurred this year. The decisions in the second category, i.e., Top 10 IP Cases/Judgements (Jurisprudence/Legal Lucidity) reflect those that we thought showed a fair bit of jurisprudential rigour and/or legal lucidity. Nataraj, Ms.
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. News from India.
Now in its second edition, the book offers a perspective on how one can address the overlap between intellectual property (IP) rights, either to reconcile them in whole or in part, or to pre-empt one over the other. The volume is a beautiful testimony to the work of late Shamnad Basheer, who co-edited the first edition.
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 is what Kasim has to say: The task of writing on the subject matter of intellectual property (IP) is always an onerous one for a lot of reasons. One of such reasons is the volatility of IP law. IP law is mutably capricious in nature; it changes almost daily in its scope, scale and tenor.
She highlights that the emphasis is on investing only in royalty revenue and not buying the artist’s rights or retaining control over their work. NFTs (Non-fungible tokens), which act as a certificate of ownership for whatever the creator puts up for sale, allow artists to set their preferred terms of contract while making sales.
This means the tattoo artist holds the exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, and display the design. COMMISSIONED TATTOOS AND OWNERSHIP When commissioning a tattoo, clients pay for the service, not the copyright. These rights include the right to attribution and the right to object to derogatory treatments of the work.
Keep up with the ever changing world of IP with SpicyIPs Weekly Review! PPL, claiming ownership over public performance rights via assignments from music labels, alleged infringement after its representatives discovered unlicensed use of its repertoire. This and much more in this weeks SpicyIP Weekly Review.
These affected rights encompass personalityrights, representing a distinctive form of intellectual property that transcends mere financial considerations. Personalityrights, being non-inheritable and non-assignable, highlight the personal and non-transferable essence of this form of intellectual property.
In fact, in the year 1973, efforts were made by countries supporting IP protection for typefaces to bring into existence the Vienna Agreement for the Protection of Type Faces and Their International Deposit (“Agreement”). Shivam is a recent graduate of the Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi.
Can be done with domain names, IP addresses, a combination, URL blocking. But more important with dynamic injunctions, where jurisdictions adopt some shortcut mechanism whereby an initial injunction against ISPs can be used by Ps to add URLs/domain names/IP addresses to the injunction. Gowers Review of IP—not adopted!
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.
2024 has been an explosive year for IP developments in India, with more IP divisions coming up in different High Courts, an increasing number of IP registrations and an overall higher degree of attention on IP issues in the country. d) Other IP Developments; and e) Other Notable Developments.
He did his LLM from Berkeley Law in 2023 specialising in IP and Tech law. Views expressed here are personal.] Dismantling the Defense: Why Common Justifications for Publicity Rights Fall Flat Prof. Unauthorized use for commercial gain violates these rights. [This three part post is authored by Akshat Agrawal.
NFTs are unique digital tokens that represent ownership of specific digital assets. NFTs are embedded with smart contracts—self-executing contracts written in code—that facilitate the transfer and verification of ownership. Secondly, there is a lot of confusion regarding the ownership and authorship of the work.
Wondering what IP developments took place last week? Look no further as we present to you the SpicyIP Weekly Review, highlighting the discussions that took place on the blog along with other IP news. Image Rights Alright—But Can They Trump Established Rights and Doctrines? Should They? Read the post by Prof.
He did his LLM from Berkeley Law in 2023 specialising in IP and Tech law. “It Protects Them From Exploitation” The Claim : Capitalizing on celebrities’ identity subjects their personalityrights to potential abuse and jeopardizes their career and livelihood. His previous posts can be found here.
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