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
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. &
& 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. &
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.
Considering the same, the Courts have started providing remedies under the scope of personalityrights wherein protection is granted against the unauthorized use of names, images, voice, likeness, dialogues or traits of popular celebrities.
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.
The current statute provides protection of these celebrity rights under trademarklaw, copyright law as well as passing off action for infringing the said rights. PersonalityRights: Personality is an attribute through which an individual is recognized in the society, depending upon the talent they possess.
The article endorses an intellectual property approach to understand the right and its infringement. This is achieved by understanding the parallels between publicity right and trademarklaw. Throughout the article, the author derives insights from US case laws which have had a considerable influence on Indian courts.
In India, most notably videos of the popular TV personality Rajat Sharma were seen circulating online where he was seen spreading misinformation, damaging his reputation as a credible journalist. The journalist sought a permanent injunction, contending the wrongful use of AI infringed IP and personalityrights.
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.
The Cowichan could have had a stronger claim against Ralph Lauren, given that they had already turned their minds to protecting their intellectual property through trademarklaw. In 2009, the Belgian Court of Appeal was tasked with deciding whether a tattoo could be granted ownership under Belgian copyright law in JDH v JM.
TRADEMARKS AND TATTOOS Tattoos can also intersect with trademarklaw. For example, if a tattoo features a recognizable brand logo or slogan, it could infringe on the trademark holder’s rights. These rights include the right to attribution and the right to object to derogatory treatments of the work.
There is one titled “Overlaps between Copyright, Rights of Publicity, and PersonalityRights” authored by Tyler T. The chapter is, for the most part, a jurisdictional study on the overlap between copyright, publicity, rights, and personalityrights. Their focus of jurisdiction is EU, German law, and US law.
Accordingly, any unauthorized use of any kind of logo or symbol associated with any event, can make a case of trademark infringement. PersonalityRights. With specific reference to India, personalityrights are considered a part of the right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
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. The court further observed that the domain name “arunjaitley.com” had been registered in the bad faith.
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.
Every day we come across many such influencers and celebrities endorsing products wherein the personality of an individual is traded either by validation or without. Living in an era where influential personalities are reverenced, fortifying PersonalityRights from any such misuse is a must. PERSONALITYRIGHT.
The internet era has lead to an increase of IP in the sports sphere, but has also lead to negative aspects such as cybersquatting, which although does not have a specific remedy, can be quashed using existing trademarklaw. The Indian law also provides extensive remedies against infringement and unauthorised usage.
When they do that, they open themselves up to accusations of unauthorisedly infringing on the athlete’s personalityrights. But the patriotism of FMCG and other companies, entities who have personality and nationality only by legal fiction, is less certain. The landmark judgement in this regard is D.M. Entertainment Pvt.
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? Through various case laws, the scope of publicity rights has been expanded by the Indian judiciary.
[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.
Google argued that even when the keyword is a trademark, it is never used in a ‘trademark sense’, thereby the invisible use of trademarks, as keyword, failing to meet the threshold to constitute infringement. Recognition of non-human inventors, AI and its implications for India.
When it discusses whether the suit contemplates any urgent interim relief, the Court, at two places in the judgement, borrows language and factors from Trademarklaw to justify the need for urgent interim relief in a suit involving Copyright infringement. This brings us to an interesting situation.
What Constitutes ‘ use’ of a Trademark While the Commercial Court appears to have sided with the respondents (Shane Ali) after prima facie finding the mark used in the film to be deceptively similar to the NBC logo, what appears to have been overlooked, is that there was no ‘use’ of trademark in the first place.
Jaitley’s right and pronounced that any person may be restrained from using the names of popular or well-known celebrities, when the particular name is a well-known trademark as envisaged under the basic principles of trademarklaw and thatcelebrity is entitled to use his name for commercial purposes.
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 B. Nagarathna and Justice Sanjay Karol.
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