sutton043

Brand protection is much harder in the digital age - small packages are a big part of the problem I have recently returned from the Second Brand Protection Congress in Frankfurt. It was a very interesting event with a wide range of speakers and topics all linked to brand protection. The talks ranged from the various online anti-counterfeiting tools and latest technological developments and intermediary liability through to the various methods that brands have adopted to protect their rights. There were far too many issues discussed for me to go into the detail they deserve but these blogs will cover off the points which I found most interesting (and I hope will be of the most interest to IPKat readers). The industry perspective The dangers associated with counterfeits and illicit trade were highlighted in David Luna ’s opening keynote. Oliver Fein went on to note that there is a tendency for business teams such as brand protection, security, IT security, IP and trade marks to work i...

Revenge porn is sometimes mentioned in textbooks and commentary as the typical case of private production gone wrong, for which IP rights would prove useful not so much for incentivising the commercial dissemination of the ‘work’ but, rather, for its taking down. Such a scenario would certainly make for an interesting IP case, testing the application of copyright or performers’ rights, or at least serve as the basis of a cheeky examination question, no pun intended.  The Paris Tribunal recently decided   one   such case of ‘revenge porn’. At the risk of disappointing readers, there were no IP rights in sight in the dispute, the entire case having been (successfully) pled on the ground of the right to privacy. In a decision dated 20 November 2018 , the Paris Tribunal decided that a former mistress, who had leaked text messages and erotic photographs of the claimant to his wife and his sister, had breached his right to privacy guaranteed by Article 9 of the French Civil Co...

If someone takes part in a photo shoot for the promotion of a clothing line, they consented to his or her image being used online as part of the designers’ advertising campaign – surely ?  Similarly, if you blur somebody’s face in a film so much so that he or she is no longer recognizable, you have dispensed with your obligation to respect their right to their image  –   surely ?  Well, don’t be so sure  –  the Paris Tribunal would reject both assumptions, according to recent judgments on image rights.  In two decisions, dated 16 November 2018 and 21 November 2018 , respectively, the Paris Tribunal (‘Tribunal de Grande Instance’) clarified the application of image rights in the context of commercial advertising, opting for an interpretation of the law favourable to models and performers. The contribution of the Tribunal’s recent jurisprudence declared that: Taking part in a photo shoot for advertising purposes does not imply consenting to all forms of...