Intellepedia | Intellepedia

Personality Rights Infringement via Deepfakes and Digital Misuse

Concept image showing legal balance scales and a gavel symbolizing justice, with a shadowed human figure in the background and a laptop displaying digital media icons and the text 'Safeguarding personality rights in the age of AI and deepfakes'.

The Bombay High Court’s decision in Suniel Shetty vs John Doe addresses personality rights infringement caused by deepfakes and digital misuse. The judgement clarifies the scope of legal remedies for celebrities and the obligations of online platforms under Indian law.

Delhi HC Orders Takedown of Fake Videos of Journalist Sudhir Chaudhary

Man wearing a white mask sitting at a desk in front of a computer

The Delhi High Court has ordered Meta, Google, and others to promptly remove AI-generated fake videos defaming journalist Sudhir Chaudhary. Recognising the urgent harm, the Court mandated swift takedown and preservation of critical data for investigation.

Court Grants ex-parte Order in Favor of Designer Gaurav Gupta

Fashion design process illustration showing dress pattern sketches, a designer drawing a dress on paper with sewing tools, and outlines of accessories like bags, shoes, and hats.

The Delhi High Court granted a permanent injunction and damages to Gaurav Gupta after finding willful trademark, copyright, and design infringement by the defendant. The judgment reinforces the legal remedies available to fashion designers in India for protecting their intellectual property rights.

Court favors AR Rahman, rejects claims that Dagar Brothers composed Shiva Stuti

Music composer at studio desk with headphones; banner text reads “Court favors AR Rahman, rejects claims Dagar Brothers composed Shiva Stuti.”

The Delhi High Court ruled that the Dagar Brothers were not the authors of Shiva Stuti, setting aside an earlier order and supporting AR Rahman’s appeal. The decision clarifies that authorship and originality are essential for copyright protection in Indian classical music.

Court Orders 10 Lakhs In Damages For Board Game Copyright Infringement

Family playing a word board game on a garden patio, placing letter tiles on a grid board.

The Delhi District Court awarded 10 lakhs in damages to the creator of ShabdKoshish for copyright infringement by the board game Aksharit. This judgment reinforces the significance of originality and the legal remedies available for copyright holders in India.

When ‘WOW’ Isn’t Your Own: Trademark Infringement Between MOMO and BURGER

Split banner: plate of steamed momos with red chutney vs sesame-seed burger with text “WOW? A MOMO or a BURGER”

The Delhi High Court ruled that generic terms like WOW cannot be exclusively claimed as trademarks without strong secondary meaning. This decision emphasises the need for distinctive elements in branding under Indian trademark law.

From Refusal to Reconsideration: A Second Chance for Zhejiang’s Hair Dye Patent

Hairbrush and bowl of white hair dye cream beside a brown hair lock; banner text: A Fresh Review for Hair Dye Patent

Madras High Court gives Zhejiang’s hair dye patent a new lease on life, quashing an unreasoned refusal and directing a fresh, reasoned hearing.

No Trademark Infringement by Registered Proprietor

A brass camphor burner with white camphor crystals on a wooden table, surrounded by incense sticks and flower petals.

The Bombay High Court ruled that no trademark infringement or passing off was established against the registered proprietor of KARPURE and AIR KARPURE. The Court found the marks and trade dress sufficiently distinct, dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim for interim relief.

Newer ‘Blue-Jay’ Mark knocked off the League

The Delhi High Court has struck down the ‘BLUE-JAY’ trademark, siding with Major League Baseball against PMS Creations. The Court held that MLB’s prior use and transborder reputation trumped the respondents’ registration, which was tainted by dishonesty and bad faith.

Delhi High Court Remands Trademark Applications for Re-Examination

A warning sign with a yellow background and black border displaying the text "WARNING: PROCEDURE LAPSES AHEAD" under a triangular caution symbol, indicating potential procedural errors or issues.

In the case of M/s Kamdhenu Limited v. Union of India & Ors., the Delhi High Court exercised suo moto jurisdiction under Article 226 to address procedural lapses by the Trade Marks Registry in accepting trademark applications. The Court found omissions in the Search Reports and noted the lack of application of mind by the Registry, prompting remand of the applications for fresh examination.