Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.44 seconds)
Digital Collectibles Pte Ltd And Ors. vs Galactus Funware Technology Private ... on 26 April, 2023 cites

Tata Press Limited vs Mahanagar Telephone-Nigam Limited & ... on 3 August, 1995

59. Nor would the aforesaid use by OFS operators amount to infringement of the common law right of publicity. OFS operators use information of all available players available in public domain for the purposes of identification of the players for playing the game. This obviates any possibility of confusion that a particular OFS platform is being endorsed by a particular player or has an association with a particular player. The plaintiffs themselves concede the right of an OFS operator to use all 9 Tata Press Ltd. v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited and Others, (1995) 5 SCC 139; Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India, (1972) 2 SCC 788.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 43 - K Singh - Full Document

Bennett Coleman & Co. & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 30 October, 1972

59. Nor would the aforesaid use by OFS operators amount to infringement of the common law right of publicity. OFS operators use information of all available players available in public domain for the purposes of identification of the players for playing the game. This obviates any possibility of confusion that a particular OFS platform is being endorsed by a particular player or has an association with a particular player. The plaintiffs themselves concede the right of an OFS operator to use all 9 Tata Press Ltd. v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited and Others, (1995) 5 SCC 139; Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India, (1972) 2 SCC 788.
Supreme Court of India Cites 62 - Cited by 330 - S M Sikri - Full Document

Akuate Internet Services Pvt. Ltd. & ... vs Star India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. on 30 August, 2013

64. Facts which are available in public domain such as match information cannot be monopolized and even if a third-party were to publish such information for commercial gain, no actionable right arises in favour of the plaintiffs. A Division Bench of this Court in Akuate Internet Services Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. Star India Pvt. Ltd. and Anr., 2013 SCC OnLine Del 3344 has held that one can monetize or license only that over which one has Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AMIT BANSAL CS(COMM) 108/2023 Page Signing 42 of 51 13:09:16 Date:26.04.2023 2023:DHC:2796 property rights. In the aforesaid case, the plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction and damages alleging that the defendants had violated "mobile rights" and "mobile activation rights" of the plaintiffs that were exclusively assigned to the plaintiffs by the BCCI. A learned Single Judge of this Court granted injunction in favour of the plaintiffs. In appeal, the Division Bench reversed the judgment of the learned Single Judge by observing that facts and information that are available in public domain cannot be claimed as an exclusive property of an entity and such information cannot be licensed by the said entity in favour of another. Resultantly, even if the defendants are using the information available in public domain in the course of commerce, no injunction can be granted in favour of the plaintiffs.
Delhi High Court Cites 62 - Cited by 5 - S R Bhat - Full Document
1   2 Next