Celebrities, influencers equally liable if they endorse misleading ads: Supreme Court in Patanjali case
The Supreme Court’s directive requiring self-declaration forms from broadcasters and print media before airing advertisements is a measure to combat misleading advertisements and safeguard consumer interests.
The Court’s stance on the liability of celebrities and social media influencers for endorsing misleading ads underscores the importance of ethical advertising practices and prioritizes consumer welfare.
Read our detailed post here.
Use of ‘Bible’ in book’s title: Madhya Pradesh High Court issues notice to Kareena Kapoor Khan
In the instant matter, the applicant, a resident of Jabalpur, is an advocate who is himself representing the case sought the registration of a case against actor Kareena Kapoor Khan and others for naming her book on pregnancy. The primary issue is whether the use of the word “bible” in the title of Kareena Kapoor Khan’s book constitutes an act that offends religious sentiments, specifically those of Christians. The applicant alleged that the usage of the word “bible” in the book title infringes upon the religious sensitivities of Christians.
The Court issued notices to the respondents, including Kareena Kapoor Khan and others. The Court deemed it necessary to seek an explanation from Kareena Kapoor Khan and the other respondents regarding the rationale behind incorporating the word “bible” in the title. The matter is expected to be listed for further proceedings after the Court’s vacations in July.
Delhi High Court Passes John Doe Order In Favour Of Indian Hotels Company Over Use Of ‘Ginger’ Trademark By ‘Fraudulent Websites’
In a significant legal development, the Delhi High Court has issued a John Doe order in support of the Indian Hotels Company, a member of the TATA Group, in a trademark infringement lawsuit against several unidentified fraudulent websites. Justice Sanjeev Narula, presiding over the case, issued a summons following the plaintiff’s complaint.
Furthermore, the court has banned the unidentified parties involved in the lawsuit from reproducing or publishing copyrighted photos of the GINGER Hotel premises.
Microsoft, Google move Delhi High Court against order to remove non-consensual intimate images online
Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta appeared for Microsoft and said that the single-judge had relied on the tool used by Meta (Facebook) to remove such content. However, he said, there is a difference between Meta and Bing (Microsoft’s search engine) because unlike Meta, Bing does not host any content.
SharkTank India Sends Legal Notice To Start-Ups Over Copyright Issues
Around eighteen start-ups are affected because of this. This has led to the Meta ad accounts of several start-ups being disabled, which in turn is affecting the businesses of start-ups. However, under the Indian copyright law, the rights of the producer (Sony) are protected, and the producer also has exclusive rights over the content.
Nitesh Tiwari’s ‘Ramayana’: Who has the rights?
The leaked pictures of Ranbir Kapoor and Sai Pallavi, who are playing Lord Rama and Sita in the upcoming “Ramayana” being directed by Nitesh Tiwari of Dangal fame, have caught the attention. But now, the former producers of the film, Allu Arvind and Madhu Mantena, have sent a public legal notice to the current producers.
The agreement was contingent on a certain payment which has not been made. The notice further states that Allu Mantena Media Ventures LLP will take necessary steps to protect their copyright.
Delhi HC Directs Swiggy & Zomato To Delist 13 Restaurants For Trademark Infringement Against Domino’s
The Delhi High Court issued directives to food delivery platforms Swiggy and Zomato, instructing them to remove and delist links associated with 13 restaurants accused of appropriating the trademark of Domino’s Pizza and selling their products through these platforms.
Petitioner’s counsel argued that the defendant entities were using marks identical or deceptively similar to Domino’s, leading to confusion among consumers. He pointed out that these marks were used to operate outlets selling similar products on Swiggy and Zomato.
The Court decided that the injunction against these restaurants would be effective from June 1, 2024, to allow them time to change their tradenames and trademarks. This decision was made to facilitate the defendants in making necessary alterations but not later than the specified date.
Minors should be taught about ‘virtual touch’ to be safe on social media: Delhi High Court
Delhi High Court recently observed educating minors about ‘virtual touch’ involves teaching them about appropriate online behaviour, recognizing warning signs of predatory behaviour and understanding the importance of privacy settings and online boundaries, the Court explained.
Akshay Kumar and Arshad Warsi’s Jolly LLB 3 in legal trouble for allegedly making fun of judiciary
Ajmer District Bar Association President, Chandrabhan Singh Rathod reportedly filed the complaint against the producer, director and actors for making fun of lawyers and judges. In the complaint, Chandrabhan apparently claimed that the film presents lawyers and judges in an “inappropriate” way which, he termed, is “humorous and indecent”.
Ajmer District Bar Association has filed an application in the court of Civil Judge Ajmer North to stop the shooting of Jolly LLB 3. They have requested the court to issue a notice.
AR Rahman could be in Legal Trouble For Copyright Issues Related To His 2022 Sensory Experience Film ‘Le Musk
The entities under Mai Group may sue him against “unauthorized utilization of their revolutionary sensory-driven technology.” The group claims to have a technology that can integrate all human senses and create a transcendental immersive experience for all its users.
Consumer Court Orders Cinema Hall to Compensate for Damaging Clothes Due to Faulty Seat
In a notable consumer rights case, a man in Jaipur received compensation from a local cinema after his kurta was torn by a broken seat. The District Consumer Commission ordered Carnival Cinema to pay the complainant a total of INR 23,500, which includes reimbursement for the kurta priced at INR 1,500.
US Supreme Court rules against Warner Music in copyright damages case
The US Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Miami music producer in a legal fight with Warner Music over a song by rapper Flo Rida, resolving a dispute over the time limit for claiming monetary damages in copyright cases.
Nealy sued music publishing company Warner Chappell and others, arguing that they took an invalid license to “Jam the Box” from Butler, his former business partner, while Nealy was incarcerated for cocaine distribution. The producer requested damages for alleged copyright infringement dating back to 2008.
A federal judge decided that Nealy could recover damages only for infringement that happened during the three years before he filed the lawsuit, based on the US statute of limitations for bringing a copyright-infringement case after discovering a claim. The Atlanta-based 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision and said there was “no bar to damages in a timely action.”
‘Road House’ Copyright Dispute Sparks Countersuit From Amazon Studios, MGM
In his lawsuit, Hill said that he that he wrote the screenplay “on spec,” meaning that he penned the work on his own volition in the hope of finding an interested buyer.
MGM asserted that the screenplay was written as a work-made-for hire under Hill’s production banner Lady Amos.
According to the complaint brought by Hill, Amazon used generative artificial intelligence to meet a deadline to complete the remake, which was threatened by the actors strike. He accused the studio of utilizing AI tools to replicate the voices of the movie’s actors in violation of the collective bargaining agreements of SAG-AFTRA and the Director’s Guild of America. Amazon MGM Studios denied the allegations.
