Remove 2002 Remove Intellectual Property Law Remove Marketing Remove Trademark Law
article thumbnail

Advent of AI Voice Generation and Threat to Personality Rights

IP and Legal Filings

There are no separate legal provisions for these rights and they have been included under the existing Intellectual Property laws. In this technologically advanced age, success or failure of a business depends heavily on the marketing strategies that have been adopted. 893 of 2002 (Del) (India). [2]

article thumbnail

Can Braille Be Registered As a Trademark?

IP and Legal Filings

19] Being able to distinguish one’s trademark falls at the centre of the trademark law, as otherwise, it is liable to be rejected under Section 9(1) of the Act. 3] A Draft of Manual of Trademark Practice & Procedure, 3.2.4. [4] 5] Trademark Act, 1999, §2, No. Brandon & Co. [23] 24] (emphasis supplied).

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Publicity Rights: An analysis of Amitabh Bachchan V. Rajat Nagi & Ors.

Intepat

For instance, famous Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan has registered his name “Shah Rukh Khan” and the initials “SRK” as a trademark to protect his publicity rights. Publicity Rights Under Indian IP Law In India, there is no direct statute that governs publicity rights in the intellectual property law regime.

article thumbnail

India – Trademark Protection in the Hospitality Industry

Kashishipr

Here in this article, we shall shed light on the relationship between Trademark Law and the hospitality sector in India. Relationship between Trademark Law & the Hospitality Industry. Hotels and restaurants must get their brand names and logos registered as trademarks for the ease of operating a business in India.

article thumbnail

Defining Boundaries: IP Law Addresses Exterritoriality, Lexicography & Human Touch

LexBlog IP

.” But our problem often is that the law, or lawyers, frequently use unfamiliar or exotic terms that others claim have no more understood meaning than a reference to a “ vermicious kind ,” and those or other lawyers may overuse a word that they do not seem to actually comprehend. One is the case of Abitron Austria GMBH v.

Law 52