Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (September 28- October 4)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

Beating the Monday blues after a long weekend, here we are with the first Weekly Review of October, featuring a post on Section 124, case summaries of orders passed by different High Courts last week, and updates on other national and international IP developments. Anything we’re missing? Drop a comment and let us know below. Highlights of the Week Can Section 124 be Invoked in Section 47 Cancellation Proceedings under the Trade Marks Act, 1999? The interplay between trademark infringement

SpicyIP Weekly Review (September 28- October 4) Read More »

Logo for Marvel Studios' series "What If" with the title written in red with black background

Can Section 124 be Invoked in Section 47 Cancellation Proceedings under the Trade Marks Act, 1999?

/ By / Trademark

The interplay between trademark infringement proceedings and non-use cancellation proceedings under Sections 47 and 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 raises a deceptively simple question: can a Section 47 proceeding trigger a stay of an infringement suit? With the Calcutta and Delhi High Courts taking divergent approaches, Arushi Bisht and Snehal Singh examine the statutory and practical implications of treating “rectification proceedings” under Section 124 as encompassing non-use cancellation proceedings. Arushi Bisht is an Intellectual Property Attorney with four

Can Section 124 be Invoked in Section 47 Cancellation Proceedings under the Trade Marks Act, 1999? Read More »

SpicyIP Bells & Whistles: IP Events and Opportunities (29.09.2026)

/ By / Courses & Workshops, Opportunities

Welcome back to another week of Bells & Whistles. As always, we’ve rounded up a mix of developments, opportunities, and thoughtful reads from across the IP world along with a Bell of the Week that’s well worth revisiting. Bell of the Week: When You Don’t Know the Name of the Trademark  Every now and then, I come across a tool that makes me wonder how we managed without it.  The WIPO Global Brand Database is one of those tools. You can

SpicyIP Bells & Whistles: IP Events and Opportunities (29.09.2026) Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (21 September- 27 September)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

Posts on the Delhi High Court’s Zara v Zora ruling, the Madras High Court’s ruling in TCRC v. Ganga Rudraiah, and a post remembering late Dr. Pinaki Ghosh. This and much more in this week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment and let us know. Highlights of the Week Remembering Prof. (Dr.) Pinaki Ghosh, WBNUJS IP Chair Professor Prof. (Dr.) Pinaki Ghosh’s work in intellectual property took him from laboratories and corporate boardrooms to

SpicyIP Weekly Review (21 September- 27 September) Read More »

Logo of Zara with the word "Zara" written in black.

No Declaration Required: What the Delhi High Court’s ZARA v. ZORA Ruling Means for Section 11(2)

/ By / Trademark

The Delhi High Court’s ZARA v. ZORA ruling settles one question while leaving another lurking beneath it. A formal declaration, the Court holds, is not necessary to invoke Section 11(2). But if well-known status can be established through individual proceedings, what happens to the certainty that Rule 124 was meant to provide? Harjas Singh Gulati writes on this development below. Harjas is a Trainee Associate at ALG India Law Offices LLP. He is interested in Intellectual property matters along with

No Declaration Required: What the Delhi High Court’s ZARA v. ZORA Ruling Means for Section 11(2) Read More »

TCRC v. Ganga Rudraiah: Copyright, Acquiescence, and the Cost of an Unwritten Arrangement

/ By / Copyright

The Madras High Court’s decision in TCRC v. Ganga Rudraiah may appear to be about the ownership of BTS photographs from the making of the hit film ‘Aval Appadithan‘. But the reasoning gets considerably less straightforward when the Court’s treatment of Section 17(b), consideration, and acquiescence is examined closely. Vanshika Verma writes on this development below. Vanshika is a fifth-year B.A. LL.B. student at Symbiosis Law School, Noida, with an interest in commercial law, IPR, technology law and policy. TCRC

TCRC v. Ganga Rudraiah: Copyright, Acquiescence, and the Cost of an Unwritten Arrangement Read More »

SpicyIP Bells & Whistles: IP Events and Opportunities (22.09.2026)

/ By / Courses & Workshops, Opportunities

Welcome back to another week of Bells & Whistles. As always, we’ve rounded up a mix of developments, opportunities, and thoughtful reads from across the IP world along with a Bell of the Week that’s well worth revisiting. Bell of the Week: Who Speaks for the Public Domain?  Every now and then, I come across an organisation that makes me pause not because of the number of people it represents or the size of its operations, but because of the

SpicyIP Bells & Whistles: IP Events and Opportunities (22.09.2026) Read More »

Remembering Prof. (Dr.) Pinaki Ghosh, WBNUJS IP Chair Professor

/ By / Geographical Indication, Others, Overlaps in IP

Image Source: WBNUJS Website It is with profound sadness that I inform you of the passing of Prof. (Dr.) Pinaki Ghosh, erstwhile WBNUJS IP Chair Professor. Dr. Ghosh, had been at the university since 2019 as its DPIIT IP Chair Professor till 31st March 2026. He died at the age of 61 after a prolonged illness. As reported by his colleagues, during his tenure, nearly 24 Geographical Indication applications were taken forward with his significant involvement at the University. I

Remembering Prof. (Dr.) Pinaki Ghosh, WBNUJS IP Chair Professor Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (14 September-20 September)

/ By / Copyright, Drug Regulation, Patent, Trademark

In this edition of the SpicyIP Weekly Review, we have comments submitted by a few of our team members on the IPO’s Draft Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications in the Field of Pharmaceuticals, 2026, along with case summaries of the orders and judgments we were able to find. If we’ve missed anything, drop a comment below and let us know. Highlight of the Week Specific Comments on the IPO’s Draft Pharmaceutical Guidelines (2026) The IPO’s 2026 Draft Pharmaceutical Guidelines

SpicyIP Weekly Review (14 September-20 September) Read More »

Specific Comments on the IPO’s Draft Pharmaceutical Guidelines (2026)

/ By / Drug Regulation, Others, Patent

There is no easier way to put it – the IPO’s Draft Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications in the Field of Pharmaceuticals, 2026 (“2026 Draft Guidelines”) released 15 days ago have severe problems and require substantial reworking. There are many concerning reasons warranting an immediate and thorough revision of this draft for it to avoid disrupting patent law and patent prosecution as we know it. The 2026 Draft Guidelines have misquoted certain statutory provisions, misinterpreted some judicial decisions, misapplied

Specific Comments on the IPO’s Draft Pharmaceutical Guidelines (2026) Read More »

Scroll to Top