IP and Legal Filings

FEBRUARY 20, 2024

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 personality rights has become a growing problem in India due to deepfakes, morphed pictures, etc. Interesting right? Puttaswamy v.

Personality Rights 62

Personality Rights Privacy Social Media Intellectual Property 62

IP and Legal Filings

NOVEMBER 23, 2023

Publicity rights have attracted considerable recognition in the field of intellectual property rights. Merely put, it is an individual’s right to handle the commercial use of their name, image, individuality and personal brand.

Intellectual Property 97

Intellectual Property Privacy Branding Brands 97

IP and Legal Filings

APRIL 8, 2023

CONTRACTUAL ISSUES Various contracts are signed and executed by various performers/artists and stakeholders. CONTRACTUAL ISSUES Various contracts are signed and executed by various performers/artists and stakeholders. Production Contracts – After the director, producer, and script are ready, three categories come into play.

Privacy 75

Privacy Law Intellectual Property Music 75

SpicyIP

JANUARY 2, 2022

The plaintiff was granted, through an agreement, an exclusive non-transferable, non-assignable license for selling, supplying, and distributing the defendant’s brands in domestic and international markets. If a sub-brand performs the function, as Asava possibly does in this case, it must be treated as a trademark.

IP 143

IP Intellectual Property Copyright Trademark 143

SpicyIP

JULY 19, 2021

Pandemic Push: Royalty-Based Business Model for Better Downstream Revenue for Musicians. She highlights that the emphasis is on investing only in royalty revenue and not buying the artist’s rights or retaining control over their work. Other Posts. No Injunction on the Film ‘Nyay: The Justice’: Is It Really Just?

Advertising 105

Advertising Advertising Non-Fungible Tokens Intellectual Property 105

SpicyIP

DECEMBER 30, 2023

The Court interpreted the clause on ownership of work made during a contract of service (Section 17(c)) to not apply in situations where there is a contract between equals. The Court limited the scope of Section 17(c) to apply to contracts where the relationship between the parties is akin to that of an apprenticeship.

IP 124

IP Copyright Trademark Intellectual Property 124