Author name: Prarthana Patnaik

Divij broke the news about Spotify’s launch in India. In his post, he covers the legal battle between Spotify and Warner Chappel Music Ltd. before the Bombay HC. He also analyses the applicability of Section 31D of the Copyright Act to the facts of the case. He further questions Spotify’s decision to opt for statutory licensing in light of the principles laid down in IPRS v. Aditya Pandey decision. Pankhuri notified us about a conference on “A 3-D Perspective on …

SpicyIP Weekly Review (25th February-3rd March) Read More »

Eashan Ghosh wrote a guest post on a recent decision of the Calcutta High Court in a GI and Certification TM infringement case filed by the Tea Board of India against ITC for use of ‘Darjeeling’ as part of the name of a refreshment lounge called the Darjeeling Lounge in one of its hotels. In his analysis of the decision, he focussed upon the interpretation of the Court with regard to limitation under Section 26(4) and passing off under Section …

SpicyIP Weekly Review (18th February-24th February) Read More »

Divij wrote a post  about the recently released draft intermediary guidelines. In his post, he specifically focusses on Draft Rule 3(9) which provides for “automated tools” and “appropriate mechanisms” for identifying “unlawful” online content. Noting the response to the similar proposed changes to the EU Copyright Directive, he analyses the various adverse impacts the Rules may have on copyright  law and access to knowledge. Rishabh wrote about a worrying development in the IPAB; the Board has allegedly been conducting hearings …

SpicyIP Weekly Review (28th January-3rd February) Read More »

Thematic Highlight  We had a guest post on the issue of whether Braille, as a language, is capable of translation, reproduction or adaptation. The author first analyses the nature of Braille and comes to the conclusion that it’s a universal code for all languages and hence, can only be transliterated and not translated. She then analyses whether the conversion of a literary work to Braille would constitute adaptation or reproduction under the Act. She also goes on to analyse whether the …

SpicyIP Weekly Review (January 7-13) Read More »

We started 2019 with a bang-and quite a few interesting posts! Thematic Highlight  We had an enlightening guest post related to the Mosanto v. Nuziveedu case. In her post, the author notes that the Delhi HC had relied on a number of European precedents to conclude that Monsanto’s claimed invention covering the Bt gene construct and a process for preparing the transgenic Bt Cotton plant amounted to an “essentially biologically process” (which is excluded under Section 3(j) of the Patent …

SpicyIP Weekly Review (December 31-January 6) Read More »

This week, I had written a post on a recent Delhi HC decision dealing with a design-trademark overlap. In my post, I briefly discuss previous judicial decisions dealing with similar overlaps. I then cover the (in)famous Micolube decision and Prof. Basheer’s take on the same. Finally, I conclude that the provisions of the Design Act does not allow one to claim a remedy for passing off for a registered design and that the Delhi HC failed to consider this issue …

SpicyIP Fortnightly Review (December 3-16) Read More »