Ms. Rukmini residing in India has taken photographs of small children as a professional photographer. The photographs are taken on the theme of expression of babies. As is present in India, children are like God and hence it does not matter if the photographs are nude. This was an issue in USA as such kind of photography is defined as pornographic photographs and is expressly prohibited from being publicly exhibited. Discuss the jurisdictional issues. The facts state that photographs of small children were taken by Ms. Rukmini in India, some of them being nude. It does not state that the photos were published either in USA or in India. In absence of any such publication on the internet or otherwise, there can be no standing for USA to legally object the photos from being displayed in India. Due to the uncertainty of the issue relating to the place and manner of publication, the following instances have been assumed and answered accordingly.
[...] In India, the following are required in order to procure patent protection of a business model: The entrepreneur will be required to acquire traditional intellectual property rights that apply to businesses. For example, the registration of the company logo (trademark). Such registration would be necessary to protect the rights of the entrepreneur. After such registration, the product manufactured must be advertised. An advertisement serves the purpose of publicizing the product and creating publicity for the business as well as the product. [...]
[...] The underlying crux of a dispute, with specific pertinence to the instant case arises when a domain name which has been registered is identical to the registered trademark of another proprietor. If the plaintiff succeeds in proving that the identical nature of the domain name and the trademark causes significant confusion in the mind of the user, then he will be entitled to, an injunction against the defendant, transfer of the domain name as well. Rival Claims and different classes of goods The strength of a trademark, deceptive similarity between plaintiff and defendant's mark and the likelihood of confusion in the mind of public have been held to be the chief determinants of infringement. [...]
[...] The Banks brokerages fivers department of transportation has adopted the principles to protect information privacy. Application: Enforcement motive has to be issued against company's gas and electricity industries where the mobile companies used the customer data for marketing purpose. The U.K's data protection act of 1998 speaks about the processing without notification as the criminal liability. In one of the case such as British Gas Trading Limited v Data Protections Registrar Midlands Electricity issued the enforcement UK March 1998 notice, it was issued against companies in the gas and electricity industries where the gas supplier used the customer data for marketing purpose. [...]
[...] If that happens, then the criminal law of the nation will be applied to the case and any person found publishing or possessing or transmitting such a material other than personal use, will be held guilty and shall be punished accordingly. For such a case, India has provided under Sec and 294 of Indian Penal Code, punishment for publishing or possessing or displaying any obscene material. If the photos were posted on Internet. A material or a file, once posed on internet breaks open the geographical barrier and is thus open for everyone around the world to see or download the same just by click of a mouse. [...]
[...] A trademark, to gain international recognition requires multiple registrations in various countries where such protection is sought. The internet, however, which is not subject to territorial boundaries, would render a domain name global, undermining all geographic limitations. Legislative Activism The U.S. Congress, in an attempt to remedy the evil of cyber-squatting, enacted the Anti-Cyber squatting Consumer Protection Act in 1999 (also known as the Truth in Domain Names Act). As according to this Act, people who register domain names that are either trademarks or individual's names with the sole intent of selling the rights of the domain name to the trademark holder or individual for a profit will be liable to civil action. The matter of dilution of trademarks has also been dealt with in the Lanham Act which is found in Title 15 of the U.S. [...]
using our reader.