Remove Branding Remove Copyright Law Remove Privacy Remove Trademark Law
article thumbnail

Anil Kapoor Vs Simply Life India & Ors: An Unwavering Assurance In Safeguarding Personality Rights Against Ai

IP and Legal Filings

Union of India [1] , established that privacy is an essential Fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. Unauthorised use of someone’s identity is a violation of both their personality rights and their basic right to privacy. The Court rejected the privacy defence, which is often employed in IP proceedings.

article thumbnail

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

Intepat

If the property of a person can be protected, likewise, when a popular celebrity like Amitabh Bachchan faces possible harm regarding his brand, the same can be protected under his right to publicity. Through various case laws, the scope of publicity rights has been expanded by the Indian judiciary. Under this Act, Sec.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

A Look Back at India’s Top IP Developments of 2021

SpicyIP

In this judgment, the Delhi High Court delved into the interpretation of section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with respect to disputes involving trademark licensing agreements. The Division Bench reiterated that what makes something a trademark is the power to distinguish a product from others.

IP 143
article thumbnail

2021 IP Year in Review

IPilogue

This article summarizes the top developments reported on our blog and in patents, trademarks, and copyright law in 2021. For a review of Privacy legislation in Canada, check out Emily Prieur’s article published this week. Trademark Law. Parody in Trademarks is No Joke. Copyright Law.

IP 106
article thumbnail

Evaluating the Constitutionality of Viewpoint-Neutral Trademark Registration Laws That Do Not Restrict Speech—Vidal v. Elster (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) refused registration of “Trump Too Small” under Section 2(c) of the Lanham Act ( 15 USC 1052(c) ) because the phrase includes a living individual’s name without his written consent. VIP Products (2023) opinion and its other trademark cases.