Author name: Praharsh Gour

Praharsh Gour is an Editor and Researcher at SpicyIP, where he writes on developments in intellectual property law, innovation policy, and international trade. His work focuses on the intersection of IP and international trade, particularly the realpolitik implications of global IP enforcement for the Global South, including questions of access, regulatory governance, and institutional reform. He holds a B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) from Hidayatullah National Law University and a Master’s degree from South Asian University. Prior to joining SpicyIP, he worked as a Senior Research Fellow at the Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR), Ministry of Commerce and Industry, where he assisted in matters concerning countervailing duties, antidumping, and safeguard investigations.

[Part II] AI in the Patent Office: When Human Oversight Fails, Who Is Accountable?

/ By / Patent

In Part I of the post, I discussed the contents of the Guidelines and how using AI may cognitively affect the officers while examining a patent application.  From Personal Satisfaction to Institutional Accountability: Where does the Buck Stop? Now, I understand that some of the arguments in Part I are targeted towards the idea of using AI in patent examination and not the Guidelines per se. However, despite all the caveats for human oversight, the Guidelines state that the concerned

[Part II] AI in the Patent Office: When Human Oversight Fails, Who Is Accountable? Read More »

[Part I] AI in the Patent Office: Can Human Oversight Neutralise AI’s Influence on Patent Examination?

/ By / Patent

The CGPDTM issued new guidelines on August 7, this time to regulate AI use in the patent examination process. In a 16-page document followed by annexures of illustrative examples and a checklist for the officers, the Guidelines for the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Patent Examination Procedures seek to maintain a balance between harnessing the benefits of using AI tools in patent examination while ensuring that their use does not compromise the technical, statutory, and quasi-judicial functions of the Office. 

[Part I] AI in the Patent Office: Can Human Oversight Neutralise AI’s Influence on Patent Examination? Read More »

Image of Mr. P H Kurian in a peach coloured shirt

Remembering Mr. P. H. Kurian (1959-2026)

/ By / Others

It is with great sorrow that we share that the Indian IP fraternity lost one of its most remarkable administrators, Mr. P. H. Kurian, yesterday after a battle with cancer. A 1986-batch IAS officer, Mr. Kurian donned various hats throughout his illustrious career, as District Collector, Labour Commissioner, Managing Director of the Kerala State Industries Development Corporation (KSIDC), Principal Secretary to the Department of Industry, Kerala, Additional Chief Secretary to the Kerala Government, and Chairman of the Kerala Real Estate

Remembering Mr. P. H. Kurian (1959-2026) Read More »

Brand Name Extensions by Pharma May Finally Be Receiving Scrutiny? 

/ By / Drug Regulation, Trademark

On July 6, the Directorate General of Health Services, Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO), published a notice inviting comments on the use of brand name extensions by Pharma Companies. This stems from a representation made before the Drugs Consultative Committee alleging that a pharma company was selling different formulations under one brand name with different extensions. However, this problem has been a long-standing one, as explained by Prashant and Dinesh Thakur.  In effect, this notice seems to be towards

Brand Name Extensions by Pharma May Finally Be Receiving Scrutiny?  Read More »

Let’s IPsa Loquitur: a Quick Rundown of the Major IP Developments from 2025

/ By / Trademark

In the latest episode of Let’s IPsa Loquitur, I sat down with Sonisha, Tanishka, Kartikeya, Kartik, Ambika, Malobika, and Bharathwaj for a quick rundown of the major IP developments from 2025. In Part 1 of this three-part discussion, we go over the key Trademark Developments, featuring orders that made headlines and stood out for their jurisprudential rigour. We also discuss important policy-related developments, along with other updates that do not fall within these categories. Readers can check it out below:-

Let’s IPsa Loquitur: a Quick Rundown of the Major IP Developments from 2025 Read More »

[SpicyIP Tidbit] Patent’s Gone, War’s On: Inside Novo Nordisk’s Semaglutide Litigation Blitz

/ By / Patent, Trademark

Yesterday, Khushi and I wrote on the Semaglutide patent expiry and what it could mean for Indian generic companies and the general public. And while the market is seeing more affordable versions of the drug, a separate story is taking place in the Delhi High Court with Novo Nordisk filing a fresh set of trademark and patent infringement suits against generic companies.  The Ozempic Name Game: Novo Nordisk v. DRL Round 2 On Semaglutide injections, Novo Nordisk has filed a

[SpicyIP Tidbit] Patent’s Gone, War’s On: Inside Novo Nordisk’s Semaglutide Litigation Blitz Read More »

Wonder Drug, Generic Price: What Semaglutide’s Patent Expiry Should Really Mean for India

/ By / Patent

[This post is co-authored with Khushi Krishania. Khushi is a third-year B.Sc. LL.B. (Hons.) {Cybersecurity} student at the National Law Institute University, Bhopal, with a particular interest in the intersection of copyright and data protection law.] Christmas came early for Indian generic manufacturers as the Indian patent on Semaglutide, a potent GLP-1 receptor agonist, expired on March 20. The drug is commercially sold by Novo Nordisk as Ozempic and Wegovy and is used to manage type-2 diabetes and obesity. After

Wonder Drug, Generic Price: What Semaglutide’s Patent Expiry Should Really Mean for India Read More »

Supreme Court Refuses to Interfere in the Risdiplam Case, Rejects Roche’s SLP 

/ By / Patent

In our previous post on the Risdiplam saga, we had mentioned that Roche has filed an SLP before the Supreme Court. Earlier today, the SC dismissed this SLP with instructions to the High Court that it shall endeavour to dispose of the suit expeditiously. Roche raised the usual arguments on rare diseases, that very few companies invest in them, and that they came up with this drug after a lot of research. And stated that they were able to come

Supreme Court Refuses to Interfere in the Risdiplam Case, Rejects Roche’s SLP  Read More »

Breaking: DHC Dismisses Roche’s Appeal in the Risdiplam Case

/ By / Patent

In a huge development concerning the Risdiplam litigation saga, a division bench of the Delhi High Court has rejected the appeal against the order refusing to grant an interim injunction to Roche. Pronounced just a few mins ago, in the decision, J. Hari Shankar (for the bench) said that a credible challenge has been made on grounds listed in Section 64 (1)(f) against Roche’s patent and thus refused to interfere with the Single judge’s judgement. For the uninitiated, Section 64(1)(f)

Breaking: DHC Dismisses Roche’s Appeal in the Risdiplam Case Read More »

Taking a Look at the Patent Provisions from the India-UK CETA: Does it Set a Course for Future Trade Negotiations for India?

/ By / Patent

Two months after showing up in the news, the text of the India-UK Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) was signed and published on July 24. The Agreement is being touted as a “Historic” and “Landmark” trade deal, which is supposed to give unprecedented market access to Indian goods in the UK. This comes at an interesting time, in the midst of ongoing India-US trade agreement talks, which are being conducted under the looming threat of August 1 reciprocal tariff

Taking a Look at the Patent Provisions from the India-UK CETA: Does it Set a Course for Future Trade Negotiations for India? Read More »

Scroll to Top