Ownership Personality Rights Presentation 
IP and Legal Filings
MAY 17, 2024
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 personality rights specifically. and includes both commercial and non-commercial aspects.
SpicyIP
AUGUST 26, 2024
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 personality rights.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Intepat
OCTOBER 28, 2024
However, this emerging digital marketplace presents intellectual property challenges that mirror—but also differ from—those found in the physical world. NFTs are unique digital tokens that represent ownership of specific digital assets. Secondly, there is a lot of confusion regarding the ownership and authorship of the work.
The IPKat
SEPTEMBER 22, 2023
The beauty of this book is that the authors have taken all the above into consideration and have presented this book with deliberate simplicity and yet deep in scope and analytical preponderance. Chapter two presents the legal and policy framework for IP protection at the international, regional and domestic levels.
SpicyIP
MAY 20, 2024
Raising some concerns with this finding, we are pleased to present to you this guest post by Dhruv Vatsyayan. Reckitt & Colman (Overseas) Hygiene vs Bhateshra Bechara Hirabhai on 13 May, 2024 (Delhi High Court) The plaintiffs filed the present suit against the defendant’s use of the marks ‘Airwick’ and “Airwoc’. Warner Bros.
Kluwer Copyright Blog
APRIL 5, 2023
On appeal from an earlier order, the present ruling affirmed the Court of Venice’s competence to rule on the infringing conduct, i.e., the use of the work’s image to produce and distribute puzzles faithfully reproducing it by all the companies of the Ravensburger group. Nonetheless, this case is anything but balanced.
SpicyIP
JANUARY 2, 2022
The present case clarified that there is a distinction between cases directly arising from IPR issues and those arising from indirectly connected matters. The petitioner contented that Jayalalithaa’s personality rights and her family’s privacy rights should be protected and that the productions may be incorrect and misleading.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
88 
Let's personalize your content