Remove Artistic Work Remove Reference Remove Registering Trademarks Remove Trademark Law
article thumbnail

Bombay High Court Rules that Copyright Registration of a Label is not Compulsory

Kashishipr

Under Section 2(c) of The Copyright Act of 1957 , the label is an original artistic work. In May 2007, the label mark ‘SOYA DROP’ was registered. As per NTC’s statement, both SSPL and SK Oil Industries couldn’t claim copyright in the artistic work. Concluding Remarks.

article thumbnail

Free Mickey? (Don’t Be Goofy)

LexBlog IP

The law gives copyright owners a monopoly to exploit and monetize creative works. Copyright protection is afforded to every original literary, dramatic, musical, or other artistic work, whether published or unpublished. Trademark law has something to say about use. This hasn’t stopped Disney.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Rules “That Dog Don’t Hunt”: Bad Spaniels Toy’s Use of JACK DANIELS Marks is a Poor Parody and Dilution Act Applies

Intellectual Property Law Blog

On June 8, 2023, the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision held that a trademark claim concerning “a squeaky, chewable dog toy designed to look like a bottle of Jack Daniels whiskey” which, as a play on words, turns the words “Jack Daniels” into “Bad Spaniels” and the descriptive phrase “Old No. 1125(c)(3)(A). . __ (2023) (No. at 28-33. [8]

Fair Use 130
article thumbnail

Intellectual Property Protection for Content Creators & Social Media Influencers

Kashishipr

Remember, posting content that contains someone else’s logo, product name, or trademark may infringe upon their IPRs. Trademark Laws and regulations safeguard brand and business owners from two types of infringement, including the possibility of confusion and redress. It is easy to use and remember.

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Rules “That Dog Don’t Hunt”: Bad Spaniels Toy’s Use of JACK DANIELS Marks is a Poor Parody and Dilution Act Applies

LexBlog IP

.” [1] The Case In the District Court , Ninth Circuit and Oral Argument in the Supreme Court Jack Daniels Properties, Inc. (“Jack Daniels”), which owns registered trademarks for “JACK DANIELS”, “OLD NO. 2 on your Tennessee carpet” tarnishes the Jack Daniels trademark. at 5-7, 90-91. [6]

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Rules “That Dog Don’t Hunt”: Bad Spaniels Toy’s Use of JACK DANIELS Marks is a Poor Parody and Dilution Act Applies

LexBlog IP

.” [1] The Case In the District Court , Ninth Circuit and Oral Argument in the Supreme Court Jack Daniels Properties, Inc. (“Jack Daniels”), which owns registered trademarks for “JACK DANIELS”, “OLD NO. 2 on your Tennessee carpet” tarnishes the Jack Daniels trademark. at 5-7, 90-91. [6]

article thumbnail

Resolving Conflicts Between Trademark and Free Speech Rights After Jack Daniel’s v. VIP Products (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Ramsey is a Professor of Law at the University of San Diego School of Law. She writes and teaches in the trademark law area, and recently wrote a paper with Professor Christine Haight Farley that focuses on speech-protective doctrines in trademark infringement law.] By Guest Blogger Lisa P. Ramsey [Lisa P.

Trademark 101