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.
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.
It has cratered into a fireball of litigation that doomed the restaurant chain (e.g., It’s so complicated that the judge made an appendix recapping the status of dozens of claims: This post focuses on a sliver of the sprawling litigation empire. this article ) and is now generating truckloads of cash for many lawyers.
This is a putative class action lawsuit against a people search company for allegedly misusing publicity and personalityrights by displaying images contained in yearbooks. This case addresses the often-relevant question of whether counsel can compromise a client’s rights through use of a site or agreement to a terms of service.
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.
However, some issues owing to their subject matter, may not be arbitrable, and it may even be argued that some disputes cannot be resolved through arbitration and that litigation is the only option. Both parties are prohibited from using their domestic litigation benefits. The Drawbacks of Using ADR ADR is not without its flaws.
With a focus on EU and US approaches to the issue, Musker suggests arguments that may be useful to litigants in similar situations. Ochoa authors Chapter 9, which is devoted to the overlaps between copyright and the rights of publicity or personalityrights.
One other thing that was noteworthy from this case was that the University sought the opinion of the Kenya Copyright Board (KECOBO) on the matter and KECOBO issued a Legal Opinion wherein it stated that the University’s actions may have violated the right to human dignity and privacy, data rights, personalrights and proprietary rights.
Already enacted and practically significant , but legally non-binding is the “Personal Information Security Specification” of 2020, which similarly categorises “facial recognition features” as sensitive personal information and requires explicit, unbundled consent and specific security measures.
On one hand, they can lead to an amicable settlement between the parties and prevent lengthy litigations. Some Perspectives Would Sending a Cease-and-Desist Notice Harm Your Chances of Securing an Ex Parte Ad Interim Injunction? On the other hand, this gives a chance to the violating party to quickly dispose of the goods.
Tejas Misra explains why and how these seemingly innocuous posts may infringe on the shooter’s personalityrights. The Court reiterated that celebrities are entitled to protect facets of their personality against unauthorized commercial exploitation by third parties.
Judicial precedents in India Although innumerable domain name disputes have been litigated all over the world since early 1990s, the first case came up before an Indian court only in 1999, with the number of such cases growing ever since. The court further observed that the domain name “arunjaitley.com” had been registered in the bad faith.
Delocalization by brute force: Seen online in other areas where companies don’t bother to localize TOS, just comply with US law which is home country law; that solves the problem for them and they wait for litigation if it materializes. Authors’ rights are designed to protect that intellectual and emotional bond.
International Variations: Similar rights exist in other countries, often referred to as “personalityrights” or “rights of persona.” For non-celebrities, it can prevent emotional distress caused by unauthorized use of their identity. 3d 1268, 1273 n. 4 (9th Cir.
A recent order by a single judge of the Delhi High Court in a litigation demanding an injunction on the release of the film allegedly based around the life of Sushant Singh Rajput (‘SSR’) is another instance of the controversy surrounding the matter. I shall specifically be dealing with the contention around publicity rights.
are typically objected to on the grounds of personalityrights (publicity rights, celebrity rights, by other names), privacy and (to a limited extent) defamation. The integrity right can be exercised by legal representatives of the author as well.
on 10 May, 2024 (Delhi High Court) The defendant filed an application seeking cost of litigation from the plaintiff. on 15 May, 2024 (Delhi High Court) Image from here The present suit was filed by the plaintiff, a Hindi film actor, alleging infringement of his personalityrights, trademarks, and copyright by different defendants.
Given that Section 57 provides that the legal representative “may” exercise the moral right, they may exercise this discretion by choosing not to enforce the right as well.
The decisions in the first category, i.e., Top 10 IP Cases/Judgements (Topicality/Impact) reflect those that we thought were important from a topical point of view and were covered by the media in some way owing to the importance of parties litigating or the issue being considered or for impact on industry and innovation/creativity ecosystem etc.
The decisions in the first category , i.e., Top 10 IP Judgments/Orders (Topicality/Impact) reflect those that we thought were important from a topical point of view and were covered by the media in some way owing to the importance of parties litigating or the issue being considered or for impact on industry and innovation/creativity ecosystem etc.
In the third part of his three part post on personalityrights, Akshat discusses the real implications of granting broad personalityrights to celebrities. Akshat is a practicing litigator working at Saikrishna and Associates. Part I and II of this post can be accessed here and here.
Akshat is a practicing litigator working at Saikrishna and Associates. Views expressed here are personal.] “It Protects Their Hard-Earned Reputation” The Claim : Celebrities have valuable personalityrights due to their immense goodwill and reputation. [This three part post is authored by Akshat Agrawal.
In recent times, the Delhi High Court has been spewing out decisions involving the PersonalityRights of celebrities. We had the Anil Kapoor decision last year and similar rulings followed in 2024 dealing with the rights of Jackie Shroff , Vishnu Manchu , Arijit Singh.
In a “Jhakaas” (a slang for fantastic) news for the actor Anil Kapoor, Delhi High Court granted the actor an interim injunction against use/ misuse of his personalityrights. Image from here Image Rights Alright—But Can They Trump Established Rights and Doctrines? Simply none. Anil Kapoor one being the latest.
T Series And Another vs M/S Dreamline Reality Movies on 22 February [Punjab and Haryana High Court] The case concerned the adaptation of late Jaswinder Kaurs biography into a cinematographic film and deals with interplay of copyright with personalityrights. The Judgement was passed by Justice Anish Dayal. Under Armour v.
Akshat is a practicing litigator working at Saikrishna and Associates. Image from here [Part II] The Right to Publicity: 31 Years Since Madow’s Scathing Verdict, Yet…… The Show Must Go On? He did his LLM from Berkeley Law in 2023 specialising in IP and Tech law. His previous posts can be found here. By Akshat Agrawal C.
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