Skip to main content

FEATURED POST

D.Gowthami Reddy, Partner, M/s.Pentallect Partners

COPYRIGHT VS DEFAMATION

             The recent tussle between the well-known actors Actor Dhanush and  Actor Nayanthara over the use of few seconds of  behind the scenes footage from the movie sets of the movie ‘Nanum Rowdy Thaan’ in her recent Netflix release NAYANTHARA - beyond the fairy tale, is all over the internet. While there are people voicing out in favor of both the actors, this article is only trying to explore the legal aspects involved in this issue. Firstly, Dhanush being the producer of the above mentioned cinematograph film is the rightful and 1 st owner of the copyrighted work in the absence of any agreement to the contrary. As per the Section 17 of the copyright Act, 1957. Further, Section 14 of the Act is exhaustive of the ways in which an owner of a copyright can exploit his work. Actor Nayanthara in her public letter addressed to Actor Dhanush was very derogatory in nature and was in many places a personal attack on his character and defamatory in nature. Nevertheless, in the given case
Read more
Labels
D.Gowthami Reddy, Partner, M/s.Pentallect Partners

IS CELEBRITY IMAGE, AN EXPLOITABLE IP?

I saw a thought-provoking advertisement few days ago; a poster of a debit card with a picture of Ranveer Singh on the card and at the bottom of the poster it was written “limited edition card”. This advertisement reminded me of “the use of a persona of a celebrity as intellectual property”. These are certain specific rights enjoyed by celebrities by exploiting their celebrity image. These rights are called Image Rights or Personality rights.

Personality Rights are a mixture of privacy and publicity rights- they give celebrities the sole right to commercially exploit their personality. In everyday life, we come across many advertisements wherein celebrities are seen endorsing different products and services.

For eg; Amitab Bachhan for Maggi, Dabur, Parker; Ranveer Singh for Addidas, Kotak Mahindra, ITC’s Bingo Mad angles, Vivo smartphone; M.S Dhoni for Boost, Ashok Leyland, etc.

Marketers hire celebrities to endorse their products in the hope that the positive images of the celebrity endorser will also be passed on to the products or the brand image associated with the celebrity. Celebrities have mass communication skills which can attract people's attention and is helpful in reaching a wider audience to raise their awareness of their product or service.

As long as there is consent, all is well; if no consent or permission of the concerned celebrity is obtained you may end up in a legal puddle.


Here are few Indian and international cases wherein the celebrities sought the help of the courts against the unauthorized or inappropriate use of their Intellectual Property in their persona.

  1. Rajat Sharma v/s Zee Media
  2. Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India 
  3. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994)
  4. P.H.Manojpandian vs Dalia Sen Oberoi
  5. Phoolan Devi vs Shekhar Kapoor And Ors.
  6. Akshaya Creations & Anr. v. Muthulakshmi
  7. Titan Industries Ltd. vs M/S Ramkumar Jewellelrs
  8. Shivaji Rao Gaikwad (aka Rajinikanth) v. Varsha Productions
  9. D.M. Entertainment v Baby Gift House
  10. Sonu Nigam v. Mika Singh and Ors
  11. Sourav Ganguly vs Tata Tea
  12. ICC Development (International) Limited v Arvee Enterprises
  13. Star India Private Limited v Leo Burnett India (Pvt) Ltd.
  14. Chorian Rights Limited v MS Ishaan Apparel & others
  15. Michael Doughlas and Catherine Zeta Jones v Hello Limited
  16. Henderson v Radio Corp Pty. Ltd
  17. Paul Hogan v Koala Dundee Pty Ltd
  18. Hogan v Pacific Dunlop
  19. Carson v. Here’s Johnny Portable Toilets, Inc.
  20. Uhlig LLC v. Shirley
  21. House v. Sports Films & Talents 
  22. Arun Jaitley v. Network Solutions
  23. Gignilliat v. Gignilliat, Savitz & Bettis L.P)
  24. Gautam Gambhir V. D.A.P & Co.
  25. Elvis Presley Enterprises v Sid Shaw Elvisly Yours
  26. Fenty v. Topshop 
  27. Re Gary Honey v Australian Airlines Limited and House of Tabor Inc 
  28. Aubry v Éditions Vice-Versa Inc,
  29. Krouse v. Chrysler Canada Ltd.,
  30. Athans v. Canadian Adventure Camps 
  31. Grütter v Lombard.
  32. Gould Estate v. Stoddart Publishing Co. Ltd. 
  33. Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elects.
  34. Lugosi v. Universal Pictures 
  35. Phillips v. Scalf
  36. ETW Corp. v. Jireh Publishing,
  37. Johnny and Edgar Winter v. DC Comics
  38. Nussenzweig v. DiCorcia,
  39. James "Jim" Brown v. Electronic Arts, Inc.,
  40. Miss Kajal Agarwal Vs. The Managing Director, M/s V.V.D. & Sons Pvt. Ltd.

         

 

Labels: