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
& Ors that has once again brought to the spotlight the debate of balancing the protection of celebrity personalityrights and the freedom of expressions and parodical use. Rights or Wrong?: Are We Going in the Correct Direction for PersonalityRights? India Pride Advisory Private Ltd. &
However, the order was brief and did not specify any statutory or common law basis for the protection of personalityrights, merely citing Titan Industries as precedent. For example, can personalityrights be viewed as an extension of the right to privacy? In Gautam Gambhir v. D.A.P & Co. &
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 Personalityrightsrefer 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.
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.
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.
Jokes aside, the title of today’s post is “Your Face, is My Case,” because we’re talking about likeness and image rights, sometimes collectively referred to as “personalityrights.” Student athletes are allowed to fully control their personalityrights and make money licensing them.
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.
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.
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. La entrada A blow to image rights?: Ricardo López Alzaga.
Using company designations in customer reference lists without explicit authorisation is grounds for infringement, Munich’s regional court has held. However, this ruling does not guarantee that further reimbursement will be granted.
Using company designations in customer reference lists without explicit authorisation is grounds for infringement, Munich’s regional court has held. However, this ruling does not guarantee that further reimbursement will be granted.
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.
referring to the DM Entertainment v. But if it’s a personalright, then it obviously ceases with the individual’s demise. In DM Entertainment , Daler Mehndi had assigned all his rights and interests in his personality to the entity, DM Entertainment. Can publicity rights survive after a celebrity’s death?
Among the many grounds was the court’s refusal to afford post mortem protection to personalityrights of the actor. I shall specifically be dealing with the contention around publicity rights. While not empirically provable, on a quick google search, it would naturally appear to any person as if the film is based on SSR.
State of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 1963 SC 1295) case, the Court considered the power of the police to monitor history sheeters and found in the police’s favor, holding that the Constitution does not guarantee the right to privacy. Disclosure of even true private facts has the tendency to disturb a person’s tranquility.
The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants are unknown individuals or entities (referred to as ‘John Doe,’) who are unauthorizedly misusing the plaintiff’s trademarks “FEDERATED HERMES” and logo to operate a fraudulent investment and stock trading business.
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.
Citing the agreement, the defendant requested the suit to be referred to an arbitration. The petitioner contented that Jayalalithaa’s personalityrights and her family’s privacy rights should be protected and that the productions may be incorrect and misleading. Durga Trading Corporation was clarified in this case.
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.
It refers to marketing in respect of trending topics/events usually undertaken by brands to gain traction and benefit from the popularity that the trending events have garnered. PersonalityRights. Indian courts have over time recognized personalityrights of celebrities in different judgments. Tata Tea Ltd (CS no.
Cable, Video & Music Piracies The illegal production and sale of videos/movies are referred to as video piracy. After reviewing similar relevant cases and precedents, the court dismissed the suit, ruling that celebrity rights cannot be granted or recognized without regard for the actual concept of The Right to Privacy.
This scenario begs ethical and legal questions about the use of voices for misleading reasons as well as a global discussion on the boundaries of artificial intelligence, particularly with reference to voice cloning. REFERENCES Prachi Pat, AI Voice Enters the Copyright Regime: Proposal of a Three-part Framework, 34 Fordham Intell.
It should be emphasised, however, that these clauses do not specifically preclude arbitration, and issues relating in personalrights are arbitrable. References [i] Civil appeal No. As a result, such provisions may generate considerable misunderstanding in this field. Author: Niyati Vishwakarma, A student of BALLB(Hons.),
which follow and have codified legislation on publicity rights in general for sports. sports/singapore-billionaire-acquires-ronaldo-image-rights [7] Business-standard.com/sourav-ganguly-slaps-damage-suit-on-tata-tea [i] The Constitution of India, 1950, art.
In this regard, it’s important to distinguish reputation in the context of defamation, from the reputation limb of the integrity right. In defamation, the cause of action cannot be exercised posthumously. Thus, while evidentiary obstacles such as the above can be overcome, on a practical level, posthumous enforcement raises more questions.
Broadly, AI refers to the capability of performing tasks or processing information using its own intelligence, algorithms, or commands, independent of human intervention. student from Hidayatullah National Law University.
Fantasy Sports refers to an area of online gaming wherein participants put together virtual teams composed of proxies of current professional players within a league and play for points and/or money. In addition to trademarks, the players are entitled to certain rights which are covered under the arena of ‘publicity rights’.
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. This decision is likely to influence future legal standards on personalityrights and the application of emerging technologies.
To address this, the appellant proposed amendments, primarily removing references to treatment and refining claim language. The Court allowed these changes, reasoning that under Section 59 of the Patents Act, amendments are permissible if they remain within the scope of the original claims and do not introduce new subject matter.
Donjinshiisa self-published fan bookthatuses the existing manga characters violating the personalityrights of the characters as was established in the famous caseof V.T. They already face a hard time protecting their rights due to the already existing illegal indulgence of the fans, this will add on to their misery.
[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 Court analysed the jurisprudence of comparative advertisement, ‘overall effect’ test and referred to multiple case laws to conclude that the act of the defendants mislead and disparage plaintiff’s products due to strong association of blue colour with plaintiff’s products within the public. emphasizing on person skilled in the art.
In considering whether this was a case of passing off, the court referred to Montari Overseas vs. Montari Industries Ltd. [2] The right to use the name “Arun Jaitley” vested with the plaintiff alone on account of being a well-known mark and the plaintiff’s personalright and entitlement to use his personal name.
ABSTRACT There has been a dramatic increase in the commercial use of celebrity personalities by people not authorized to do so compared to the earlier times. Protecting personalityrights has become a growing problem in India due to deepfakes, morphed pictures, etc. Interesting right? Puttaswamy v.
International Variations: Similar rights exist in other countries, often referred to as “personalityrights” or “rights of persona.” ” Your Right of Publicity, Name and Likeness A claim for violation of Right of Publicity can be either statutory or common law and varies state by state.
the Bombay Court recently took a pro-publicity and -personalityrights stance in an ex-parte ad-interim order concerning the unauthorized use and cloning of Indian artist Arijit Singh ’s voice by multiple defendants. In essence, Arijit Singh lamented a troubling array of violations of his publicity and personalityrights.
In all this, it is worth recalling that, under Italian law, image/personalityrights have traditionally received broad protection. Comment There is little to say regarding this decision, if not that it appears difficult to imagine how the Court could have held otherwise.
Typeface’ refers to the particular design of letters, numbers, marks and symbols. What we colloquially refer to as ‘font’ is actually the typeface as font changes with the size, italic, bold, and style. Shivam is a recent graduate of the Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi. Before we begin, let me lay down the glossary for this post.
Codible Ventures LLP and Others , the Bombay High Court addressed a legal dispute of infringement of personalityrights through the use of AI. The suit also involved a claim for the violation of his moral rights under Section 38B of the Copyright Act, 1957. In a recent judgment in the case of Arijit Singh v.
are typically objected to on the grounds of personalityrights (publicity rights, celebrity rights, by other names), privacy and (to a limited extent) defamation. Accordingly, reputation, in line with its usage in defamation law, is the regard or esteem in which a person is held by others.
The problem is not human, but the work In fact, the whole issue is not about a person, but about a work. If someone invades your privacy, you can enforce your personalityrights. Everything that is distinct from the person and serves the use of people can be protected ( ABGB § 285 ).
She argues that the law should broaden the definition of serious comparative advertisement (where the owner of the mark advertises his product reference to his competitor’s product based on scientific study) by allowing multiple comparisons. In this guest post , Sangita Sharma analyses the law around comparative advertisements in India.
In the Tribunale di Firenze’s decision, while the reference to the constitutional norm seems to represent a mere rhetorical exercise, the content of the exclusive right would be traceable in the provisions of the Cultural Heritage Code. The Tribunale di Firenze applied the Italian law: art. 9 of the Constitution , art.
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