PROTECTION OF CELEBRITY RIGHTS: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RELEVANT IPR LAWS IN US, UK AND INDIA
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper is a modest endeavour to explain a comparative analysis of laws and judicial trends for protection of celebrity rights from U.S., U.K. and India. This paper is based on the evaluation of multi jurisdictional regime of protection granted to celebrity rights, with the analysis of precautions undertaken for balancing the public and private interest while protecting celebrity’s persona and identity. Further, the need for international recognition and universal application of celebrity rights protection forms to be an important aspect of the paper. The concluding remarks derived are firstly, in comparative analysis it can be found that India is at nascent stage of development for protecting publicity rights with no specific protection granted, U.K. does not recognize the concept of publicity rights on one hand and on the other U.S. has given due recognition to publicity rights protection and provided statutory mandate of protection in its twenty two states; Secondly, Publicity right requires a specific statutory protection as other laws fail to protect the right in complete sense. Lastly, there is need of international treaty for publicity rights protection to provide the right international standard and develop uniform mandates of protection in different jurisdictions.
Abstract
This paper is a modest endeavour to explain a comparative analysis of laws and judicial trends for protection of celebrity rights from U.S., U.K. and India. This paper is based on the evaluation of multi jurisdictional regime of protection granted to celebrity rights, with the analysis of precautions undertaken for balancing the public and private interest while protecting celebrity’s persona and identity. Further, the need for international recognition and universal application of celebrity rights protection forms to be an important aspect of the paper. The concluding remarks derived are firstly, in comparative analysis it can be found that India is at nascent stage of development for protecting publicity rights with no specific protection granted, U.K. does not recognize the concept of publicity rights on one hand and on the other U.S. has given due recognition to publicity rights protection and provided statutory mandate of protection in its twenty two states; Secondly, Publicity right requires a specific statutory protection as other laws fail to protect the right in complete sense. Lastly, there is need of international treaty for publicity rights protection to provide the right international standard and develop uniform mandates of protection in different jurisdictions.
참고문헌 (45)
- Black, Gillian, "Publicity Rights and Image Exploitation and Legal Control" (2012), Hart Publishing
- Boorstin, Daniel J., "The Image : A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America" (1961), Harper
- Jain, M. P., "Indian Constitutional Law" (2008), Wadhwa and Co
- McCarthy, J. Thomas, "Rights of Publicity and Privacy" (1999), Clark Boardman Callaghan
- McCarthy, J, "The Rights of Publicity and Privacy" (2018), Clark Boardman Callaghan
- McCarthy, J, "The Rights of Publicity and Privacy" (2004), Clark Boardman Callaghan
- Morgan, Owen, "International Protection Of Performers’ Rights" (2002), Oxford
- Solove, Daniel J., "The Future of Reputation" (2007), Yale University Press
- Viera, John David, "Images as Property in Image Ethics : The Moral Rights of Subjects in Photographs, Film , and Television" (1988), Oxford University Press
- Ahmed, Tabrez, "Celebrity Rights : Protection under Intellectual Property Laws", Journal of Intellectual Property Right, 16 (2011)
- Antezana, Monica E., "The European Union Internet Copyright Directive as Even More than it Envisions: Toward a Supra-EU Harmonization of Copyright Policy and Theory", Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 26(2) (2003)
- Bartholomew, Mark, "A Right is Born: Celebrity, Property, and Postmodern Lawmaking", Buffalo Legal Studies, 44(2) (2010)
- Basil and Markesinis, "Concerns and Ideas About the Developing English Law of Privacy", American Journal of Comparative Law, 52(1) (2004)
- Bvers, David C., "CoDvrieht to Life: Toward Copyright Protection for Name and Likeness", Cal . St . B . J ., 56 (1981)
- Goodman, Eric J., "A National Identity Crisis: The Need for A Federal Right of Publicity Statute", DePaul Journal of Art , Technology & Intellectual Property References
- Dr. Lisa P. Lukose, "PROTECTION OF CELEBRITY RIGHTS", Law, 9(2) (1999)
- Halpern, Sheldon W., "The Right of Publicity: Maturation of an Independent Right Protecting the Associative Value of Personality", Hastings Law Journal, 46(3) (1995)
- Heneghan, Patrick J., "The Service Mark Alternative to the Right of Publicity: Estate of Presley v. Russen", Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review, 2(1) (1982)
- Martuccelli, Silvio, "An up-and-coming Right – The Right of Publicity: Its birth in Italy and its Consideration in the United States", Entertainment Law Review, 4(4) (1993)
- Mostert, Frederick W., "Well-Known and Famous Marks: Is Harmony Possible in the Global Village", Trademark Rep, 86 (1996)
- Oguamanam, Chidi, "Beyond Theories: Intellectual Property Dynamics in the Global Knowledge Economy", Wake Forest Intellectual Property Law Journal, 9(2) (2009)
- Peles, Gil N., "Right of Publicity: A Practitioner’s Enigma", Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 17(2) (2010)
- Weber, Olaf, "Human Dignity and the Commercial Appropriation of Personality: Towards a Cosmopolitan Consensus in Publicity Rights?", SCRIPT-ed, 1(1) (2004)
- Webner, W. Mack, "Transformation: The Bright Line between Commercial Publicity Rights and the First Amendment", Akron Law Review, 37(2) (2004)
- Zimmerman, Diane L., "Who Put the Right in the Right of Publicity?", DePaul Journal of Art , Technology & Intellectual Property Law, 9(1) (1998)
- "A Brief History of the Right of Publicity"[URL]
- "A Brief History of the Right of Publicity"[URL]
- "Statutes & Interactive Map"[URL]
- "Publicity Rights Aren’t Property Rights: Appellate Court Gets It Very Wrong in Hart v. Ea" (2013)[URL]
- "Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition 1995, s. 46-49"[URL]
- "Haelan Laboratories v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc., 202 F 2d 866 (2nd Cir.)", ~ (1953)
- "Kharak Singh v. State of U .P ., AIR 1963 SC1295: (1964) 1 SCR 332", ~ (1964)
- "Rajagopal v. State of T .N, (1994) SCC 632", ~ (1994)
- "Justice K . S . Puttuswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India , Writ Petition (Civil) No 494 of 2012", ~ (2012)
- "Roberson v. Rochester Folding Box Co ., 1902, 171 NY 538", ~ (1902)
- "Zacchini v. Scripps -Howard Broadcasting Co ., (1977) 433 U.S", ~ (1977)
- "Lyngstad v. Anabas Prods . Ltd ., (1977) F.S.R. 62 (Ch.); In re Elvis Presley Trade Marks , (1997) 13 R.P.C. 543 (Ch.): (1999) 16 R.P.C. 567 A.C", ~ (1997)
- "In re Elvis Presley Trade Mark s, (1997) 13 R.P.C. 543 (Ch.): (1999) 16 R.P.C. 567 A.C", ~ (1997)
- "Downing v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co., (2001). 265 F.3d 994", ~ (2001)
- "Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, Article 6bis Sept. 9, 1886, 828 U.N.T.S. 221 (last revised at Paris, July 24, 1971)", ~ (1886)
- "Copyright, Designs and Patents Act", ~ (1988)
- "Human Rights Act", ~ (1998)
- . In the United States, the Code of Federal Regulations provides for registrability of “entertainment and sporting and cultural Activities” as marks. 37 C.F.R. § 6.1(41), , 1997
- "Trade Marks Act, 1994, s.26", ~ (1994)
- "WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, Dec. 20, 1996", ~ (1996)