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
are typically objected to on the grounds of personality rights (publicity rights, celebrity rights, by other names), privacy and (to a limited extent) defamation. Such treatment usually amounts to violations of the moralrights of the author.
In addition to copyright infringement, the plaintiff also claimed violation of moralrights and infringement of posthumous celebrity rights. In this post, I will explore the different considerations that the court might look into in reaching its decision about the above rights. The Right to Integrity.
Recognising the challenges for performers in the position and enforcement of their rights, the book also includes discussion on other forms of protections and remedies for performers, such as moralrights, contracts, passing off and copyright infringement. Actors, dancers, musicians and singers, yes. What about a juggler?
Mango, in turn, sustained in its defence that (i) as the rightful owner of the physical Paintings, it was entitled to display them in public, and that (ii) the creation of digital works (i.e. Therefore, the moralright of “disclosure” had already been exhausted. an exploitation that caused them no harm).
student at the NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad. The plaintiff censured the defendants for violating privacy, right to publicity, free and fair trial, also invoking the Ashok Kumar jurisdiction of the court. Next, it delved into the question of the perpetuity or descendibility of these rights. Nishtha Gupta.
Introduction Personality rights refer to a person’s ability to safeguard his or her identity in the context of a property or privacyright. 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.
The second edition offers revised, or wholly rewritten chapters to the overlaps discussed in the first edition so as to reflect recent developments, as well as to include new chapters (the overlap between privacy and copyright law; privacy and secrecy; trademarks certification marks and collective marks; and IP and traditional knowledge).
In India, personality rights are not formally recognised. However, the twin concepts of privacy and publicity rights are gradually evolving through judicial interpretations. The issue of safeguarding personality rights has grown in prominence because of the rising exploitation of various celebrities and renowned individuals.
The preface reiterates that the purpose of the book is to describe the essential nature of living IP law: "What we want is the reader to come away with a good idea of how IP works in practice." The fourth part explains copyright and related rights including performers rights and moralrights as well as confidential information.
Samridhi is a final-year student at the Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, and a graduate in Journalism from Lady Shri Ram College for Women. With a passion for the dynamic intersection of law, media and technology, she is particularly interested in exploring intellectual property and tech policy.
In the US, a voice isn’t explicitly protected under copyright law, but there are potential protections under the right of publicity, which is enforced through state laws related to the appropriation of likeness, name, and voice. Legal precedents like Midler v.
He evaluates the various applicable laws to argue that a thesis is a ‘public document’, the right to access which is available to the public as a matter of public interest, as well as through fair use under Section 52 of Copyright Act and also the RTI Act. For further details, please see the announcement.
THE ART OF TATTOOING AND COPYRIGHT Tattoos are protected by copyright laws as original works of art. This means the tattoo artist holds the exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, and display the design. TRADEMARKS AND TATTOOS Tattoos can also intersect with trademark law.
Topics will include access and substantial similarity, fair use, performers' rights, moralrights, expert testimony, the role of lay listeners, sound sampling as it appears in court and out-of-court litigation. For more information and to register, click here. More information and submission guidelines can be found here.
Contextualized in a sectorial approach - including areas such as health, fashion, environmental, artificial intelligence, automotive, and food industry - expert panels will consider the challenges and developments in IP case law and legislation that lie ahead. Time is flying and we need to pause and analyse what has happened so far this year.
These uncanny and exact replications of celebrity voices and visuals lead to a world of problems not just from a privacy point of view, but in general IP as well. Currently, the law of Indian IP does not recognise AI as an entity which can ask for protection. With AI, this aspect has been eradicated.
The underlying lawsuit asserted misappropriation of images and likenesses for advertising purposes under state law; violation of the Virginia business conspiracy statute; and violations of the Lanham Act for false advertising and false association. The Virginia ROP “protects both a property interest and a right to privacy.”
For example, California has special laws designed to limit paparazzi photographs, thanks to its high number of celebrity residents. Laws regarding the use of a person’s likeness, also known as the right of publicity, ensures that a model or other subject of an artwork controls the commercial exploitation of their name, image, or persona.
Reviving popular artists posthumously, though nostalgic, prompts critical questions about the boundaries around consent, personality rights, moralrights, economics of the industry, and even ethics. The question is- when AI starts hitting the high notes, who holds the rights to the encore? Rajagopal v.
The issues pertaining to the rights of VTubers encompass rights to the design of the character, the privacy of the individual, licensing and taking inspiration from an existing character. 14] Valentine Labaume, ‘The Protection of Fictional Characters under EU Intellectual Property Law’ (2021) 4(2) SIPLR 34, 44. [15]
A Massachusetts judge has dismissed a lawsuit by a woman claiming that she, not Harvard University, is the rightful owner of haunting images of an enslaved father and daughter who she says were her ancestors. More here.
Two side notes before getting into the meat of the order: First , it is interesting to see that though the plaintiff raised the argument of the infringement of moralrights, the court hasn’t addressed this. Second , in different places, the Court has used the language “Personality rights and right to publicity”.
Gaon (Harry Radzyner Law School, Reichman University, Israel) considers these and other questions. Gaon also considers no-authorship possibilities as alternative rights models, such as ‘author in law’ and AI moralrights. And, if so, to what extent and what does this mean for the concept of authorship in copyright?
Protecting personality rights has become a growing problem in India due to deepfakes, morphed pictures, etc. In between these problems came Delhi High Court’s judgement in favour of Anil Kapoor wanting to get personality rights. Interesting right? Puttaswamy v. The Plaintiff also referenced Vanna White v.
In the UK, performers’ economic rights can be assigned to producers without any mechanisms for reversion, and their moralrights can be waived meaning they cannot be subsequently enforced. More from our authors: International Cybersecurity and PrivacyLaw in Practice, Second Edition by Charlotte A.
Moderator: Martin Senftleben, University of Amsterdam Copyright Law and/or/vs. a ‘Brussels Effect’ for the Digital Services Act Jennifer Urban, Berkeley Law School The Brussels Effect claim is descriptive, not predictive—can it apply to the DSA? Anupam Chander, Georgetown Law School Imagine the DSA of Brazil, India, Nigeria, or Putin.
student at Maharashtra National Law University, Nagpur and is passionate about Intellectual Property Law and Media and Entertainment Law, with a strong interest in ADR. [This post is co-authored with SpicyIP Intern Yukta Chordia. Yukta is a 4th year BA LLB (Hons.) Long post ahead.]
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