The Strategic Role of Trademarks in Protecting Image Rights: A Case Study

on Recent EUIPO Decisions

Introduction:
In the era of celebrity culture and digital distribution, the collaboration of fascinating fields like
intellectual property (IP) with image rights and celebrity culture poses different challenges
(Lange et al., 2008). Here we will explore the events in the diverse field of trademarks that
elucidate the value of preserving one's image rights. A simpler question about the protection of
one's image rights in the diverse era of digitization other than registration in trademarks is a great
achievement of this research besides the depiction of complex rights' preservation. The
recognition of a person's face eligibility by the European Union Intellectual Property Office's
(EUIPO) Fourth Chamber of Appeal for the Trade Agreement is our pinnacle focus. Two Dutch
models, Roose Abels and Marlijn Hoek, are the main characters of this story. Novel possibilities
for investigating the wider ramifications of image rights regulation are possible with the help of
their research in the trade market. The complex nature of image rights, the challenges faced by a
patriarchal system of international law, and the possible support that trademarks might provide
for one's ability to maintain control over their image are exposed as we explore this story deeply.
Understanding the legal framework governing image rights and trademarks is essential when
negotiating their complexities (Kubr & M.ed, 2002). At both the domestic and international
levels, the boundaries that control image rights are determined by the legislation. Different
strategies are used by different countries for the preservation of an image's rights.
Legal Frameworks Assessment and Recommendations through harmonized
approaches:
It is important to have a thorough understanding of the complex legal environment while dealing
with the intricate challenges of trademark and image rights. Throughout economies, image rights
display notable variation in the image rights related to legislation. For the understanding of
complex legislation by the reader, we here break down the framework of international rights in
the UK, Denmark, Spain, and the Netherlands. In the United Kingdom, people used to depend on
the law and privilege rules under certain circumstances to protect their rights. This is because
there is no proper right to publicity in the UK (Stallard & H., 1997). Dealing with the legal
system and related issues of privacy and image preservation is now focused on Denmark.
Protection of people's photos and data from any commercial use is governed by the Danish Act
on the Processing of Personal Data. Preservation of image rights is made possible with the
implementation of this legislation, besides the elucidation of personal data protection rules.
Certain laws are established in the Netherlands to maintain and regulate an attitude toward an
image's rights and personal privacy. People have the authority to ban the unauthorized use of
their personal data and images based on personal interest within the Dutch Civil Code. It also
incorporates the idea of monetizable popularity (verzilverbare populariteit").
The right of publicity, which differs throughout jurisdictions, state laws, and privacy laws, are
frequently used alongside one another to handle image rights in the United States. For instance,
as demonstrated by decisions such as Eastwood v. Superior Court, a strong protection for public
image is provided by the state of law and elucidates its significance. The difficulties that a person
can face globally are highlighted by the significant differences in methodology in each state.
Despite changes in the methodology, the basics of image rights preservation are the same. A
precise and deep understanding of rights and legislation is required for the complex legal
patchwork. It begs the question of whether a simpler international approach to image rights is
necessary (Greene & K.J.,2007).
Global standards are precisely managed and regulated internationally with the help of the World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).The main aim of this organization is to regulate
worldwide standards. A balance between promoting creativity and defending the rights of
individuals is maintained with the help of the international community within the principles and
framework determined by WIPO. With the understanding of the legislation, the fact that it is
more important to maintain and tackle the issues related to the worldwide scope of image rights
in the digital era is revealed.
Within the discussed legal framework, it is obvious that the story poses several key legal
concerns, shedding light on the growing dynamics of intellectual property law, notably in the
context of image rights. There are a lot of legal concerns in the story that highlight the
importance of the growing nature of intellectual property law. These rights are under the content
of image preservation. The eligibility of a person's face trademark is determined by the EUIPO's
Fourth Chamber of Appeal. When navigating the complicated issues of trademark and image
rights, it is crucial to have a solid awareness of the legal landscape. This decision elucidates the
pattern and procedure of someone's rights. The growing acknowledgment of the unique
personality innate in a person's face is highlighted by the thorough understanding of the
collaboration of these decisions by the EUPHIO and other decisions. For all those who are
finding a safeguard and protection for their image rights, this collaboration helps them. Besides
this protection of rights, it also rejects assumptions that a person's face lacks unique character.
The questioning about these challenges that the judiciary faces is due to the analysis and the legal
concern. Especially for non-famous and ordinary persons, challenges can be faced regarding the
persuasion of the "portrait" trademark. Adding to matters further is the legal landscape's
applicability against lookalikes and the potential for recurring filing requirements because of
aging or cosmetic changes. Due to the help of international transactional grasp, the worldwide
concept of image rights. This also aided in the illustration of new intellectual property rules. The
current confusion of laws and case law throughout states makes it difficult to reliably enforce
image rights.
In a globalized society, a more unified and successful strategy for defending image rights is
made possible with the help of a review of IP rules (Ard & B.J, 2018). The assessments urge the
review of these IP rules. With the elucidation of the necessity of uniformity and clarity, this case
also raises a possible issue with the laws as they stand. Different strategies and methodologies
are adapted by different nations for the preservation of image rights. For instance, the
Netherlands adopts the obvious method to address the image rules, while others depend on
privacy laws. The diverse legal perspective highlights the importance of an overall cohesive
framework. This framework manages the complex nature of image rights and legislation in the
digital era. A suitable platform for the legal debate and possible improvements must be provided
by the collaboration of trademarks, image rights, and the changing dynamics of the legal system
(Lemley & M, 2019). This concept is clarified in the analysis. Roos Abels and Marlijn Hoek's
narrative acts as a catalyst for reevaluating present legislation and adapting it to the problems
posed by contemporary intellectual property issues.
Synchronization of global norms is one of the suggestions that came into existence due to
international rights and legal concerns related to trade (Jain & S.C, 1996). Standard principles
are developed using collaborative efforts across boundaries that are assisted by entities like the
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Global image rights recognition and
protection would be guaranteed by this harmonization. To change federal laws, especially in
jurisdictions where there is no law related to image protection, is termed a proactive, active
approach, which also means amendments.
People can categorize and are able to understand the basics of legislation that particularly
determines the rights of images Educational institutes and organizations insist in this regard. For
the enforcement of the "portrait" trademark, guidelines establishment is another important
thought. Rights related to the privacy of data, can be protected and easily preserved preventing
the use of any kind of perosnal information for public use. With the emergence of new issues and
advancement in technology like Artificial Intelligence, the revision of legislation becomes
compulsory. This revision of rules and regulation ensures its long term effectiveness.
Conclusion:
The story of Roos Abel and Marlijn Hoek is exposed and can be clearly understood with the help
of legislation framework. This framework elucidates the complex collaborative relation between
the trademarks and image rights. . The complex nature of image rights and legislation is possible
with the help of efforts and research. The disarray of national and international laws and the
pressing need for harmonization in the digital era are also the inventions of their efforts. Three
important figures provide guidance for this legal maze, which helps to proceed further. An
integrated strategy is required first of all due to the global character of image rights (Strasser &
M, 2001). People are left at risk by the different legal patchwork that exists between
jurisdictions, leaving their online identities broken. Suppose the parts of an artist's work are
based on a specific legal framework. If any part of the piece is damaged, the artist cannot do
anything to maintain a specific balance between its all parts. In the same way, there should be
authority for the people to enjoy unrestricted protection without any kind of boundaries or
technical subtleties. An international palette over which everyone can proudly express what they
want to convey is possible with the help of collaboration between organizations like the World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the organizations that support the evolution of the
legislation. Second, navigating the perilous territory of "portrait" trademarks requires clarity and
precision. In the shadows are unanswered questions. For those who are fond of protection for
their image rights, duration, scope, and limitations, this is a great source and gives legal
professionals the resources they need to handle the complexities. All these complexities about
the preservation of privacy can be handled in a unique way without any struggle. Finally, when
privacy rights are valued and appreciated, educating individuals is an important stage in society.
The public’s efforts to understand straightforward instruments and efforts to educate can
encourage people to protect their image as well as their online profiles should be in control of the
individuals. The narrative of the Roos Abels and Marlijn Hoek provides a firm grasp of the
future journey rather than presenting the replies of the viewers. After the approaching start of the
new century, technology has changed identities, and it should be difficult to keep up with the
legal system. To stay away from complexity and social justice while keeping our focus on
personal control, peace of mind, and simplicity is our responsibility. Then, and only then, during
the age of technology, one can develop positive self-determination, illuminating the path towards
a future where every individual truly owns their face.
References:
Ard, B.J., 2018. More Property Rules than Property: The Right to Exclude in Patent and
Copyright. Emory LJ, 68, p.685.
Drahos, P., 2017. BITs and BIPs: Bilateralism in intellectual property. In Globalization and
Intellectual Property (pp. 89-106). Routledge.
Greene, K.J., 2007. Intellectual Property Expansion: The Good, the Bad, and the Right of
Publicity. Chap. L. Rev., 11, p.521.
Jain, S.C., 1996. Problems in international protection of intellectual property rights. Journal of
International Marketing, 4(1), pp.9-32.
Kubr, M. ed., 2002. Management consulting: A guide to the profession. International Labour
Organization.
Lange, D.L. and Powell, H.J., 2008. No law: Intellectual property in the image of an absolute
First Amendment. Stanford University Press.
Lemley, M., 2019. IP in a World without Scarcity. In 3D printing and beyond (pp. 30-54).
Edward Elgar Publishing.
Shapiro, C., 2000. Navigating the patent thicket: Cross licenses, patent pools, and standard
setting. Innovation policy and the economy, 1, pp.119-150.
Stallard, H., 1997. The right of publicity in the United Kingdom. Loy. LA Ent. LJ, 18, p.565.
Strasser, M., 2001. A New Paradigm in Intellectual Property Law: The Case against Open
Sources. Stan. Tech. L. Rev., p.4.
Teilmann-Lock, S., 2014. Danish design: Legal restrictions and creative responses. Design and
Culture, 6(3), pp.291-302.