Author name: Ambika Aggarwal

Ambika is a Ph.D. (IP Law) scholar at NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad. She is a SpicyIP Tech Innovation Policy Fellow (2025). Her experience includes working as a Research Assistant at the office of the DPIIT-IPR Chair, NALSAR University of Law, and she is also a recipient of the Danida Fellowship on Fostering Innovation & Commercialisation of Intellectual Property Rights (2023) awarded by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Denmark.

One Nation, Forced Licenses, Multiple Payments: (Un)Balancing AI Innovation & Copyright

/ By / Copyright

Adding to the steady stream of critiques on the DPIIT Working Paper on the interface of Copyright and AI, my post focuses on the proposed statutory recommendations, specifically, on how the proposal seeks to create new legal rights with no analysis of the corresponding duties and liabilities that will be triggered. In February, 2024 the Ministry of Commerce & Industry was sure that the existing IPR regime was well-equipped to protect AI generated works. Generative AI (GenAI) developers would need […]

One Nation, Forced Licenses, Multiple Payments: (Un)Balancing AI Innovation & Copyright Read More »

SEPs are Decorative Acronyms in Indian Innovation Policies

/ By / Patent

Core SEP issues are missing from new and proposed Indian innovation policies that seem overly fixated on generating indigenous 6G SEPs with little concern on how they may be managed, litigated and leveraged for domestic economic growth. In this post I discuss why it would be well worth the effort to follow a procedure for mapping SEP issues with dedicated impact assessments before further similar policy decisions are made. Introduction The rules of the SEP ecosystem are, at the moment,

SEPs are Decorative Acronyms in Indian Innovation Policies Read More »

The Tech is Dead, Long Live the Tech: Lessons in Indian SEP Litigation from Philips v. Bathla

/ By / Patent

On October 13, 2025, the Delhi High Court concluded a 21-year long patent dispute to give its first standard essential patent (SEP) non-infringement decision. In this judgment, the Court has ruled on patent infringement, discussed the impleadment of third-parties, identification of type of patent, requisites for claim mapping, effective use of evidence, and presentation of SEP essentiality. Interestingly the essentiality of the SEP was not framed as an issue in the suit, but the Court considered it on ‘vehement submissions’

The Tech is Dead, Long Live the Tech: Lessons in Indian SEP Litigation from Philips v. Bathla Read More »

Scroll to Top