Author name: SpicyIP

Announcing the Shortlisted Teams for the Pre-Finals 1st National Policy Brief Competition on Intellectual Property & Innovation 2025!

/ By / Opportunities

After a rigorous round of reviewing several exceptional entries, we are delighted to announce the shortlisted teams for the 1st National Policy Brief Competition on Intellectual Property & Innovation, 2025!  We’re thrilled to say that we received close to 100 entries for this competition! Though we are only able to proceed with a shortlisted lot, we saw several fantastic entries and ideas and do hope that teams, selected or not, will look to further research in this area, be it […]

Announcing the Shortlisted Teams for the Pre-Finals 1st National Policy Brief Competition on Intellectual Property & Innovation 2025! Read More »

A Course Correction? What Rangaraj and Kamal Haasan Get Right about Personality Rights

/ By / Trademark

In a marked departure from prior personality-rights jurisprudence, the Madras High Court in T. Rangaraj v. Joy Cridzila and Kamal Hassan v. Neeyevidai seems to recalibrate the threshold for injunctive relief by tethering personality rights to demonstrable commercial misappropriation rather than mere unauthorised reference by the defendants. Arjun Ishaan analyses these orders and highlights how, by separating subjective reputational grievance from enforceable legal injury, the Court restores doctrinal discipline to an area increasingly prone to over-expansive claims. Arjun is a

A Course Correction? What Rangaraj and Kamal Haasan Get Right about Personality Rights Read More »

A Terrorization of the Terroir

/ By / Geographical Indication

As climate change alters the taste, texture, and viability of iconic regional crops, the very idea of terroir is under strain. This raises a pressing legal question: when geography changes, can Geographical Indicators afford to remain static? Responding to this question, in his submission for the SpicyIP jhana Blogpost Competition, Rudra Pandey proposes solutions to the Indian GI regime. Rudra is a B.A. LL.B (Hons.) student at Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Patiala. He describes himself as “a part-time law

A Terrorization of the Terroir Read More »

Call for Submissions NUALS Intellectual Property Law Review (Vol. VII) [Submit by March 1, 2026]

/ By / Opportunities, Publication

The Centre for Intellectual Property Rights (CIPR) at the National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS), Kochi, is inviting submissions for the NUALS Intellectual Property Law Review (Vol. VII). Interested authors can send their submissions by March 1, 2026. For more details, please read their call for papers below. Call for Submissions: NUALS Intellectual Property Law Review (Vol. VII) [Submit by March 1, 2026] The Centre for Intellectual Property Rights (CIPR) at the National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS),

Call for Submissions NUALS Intellectual Property Law Review (Vol. VII) [Submit by March 1, 2026] Read More »

Staying the Numbers: Damages Quantification and the Limits of “Exceptionality” after Lifestyle

/ By / Patent

The Delhi High Court’s decision to stay execution of a damages decree in M/s Pearl Engineering v. Koninklijke Philips N.V. raises uneasy questions about when money decrees can be put on hold. Aafreen Saraf argues that by relying on doubts in damages computation, the Court stretches the Supreme Court’s narrow “exceptional cases” standard reaffirmed in Lifestyle Equities v. Amazon Technologies. Aafreen is a third-year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) student at the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (WBNUJS), Kolkata. She

Staying the Numbers: Damages Quantification and the Limits of “Exceptionality” after Lifestyle Read More »

Nippon v. Controller: DHC Sets the Standard for What Constitutes “Proof of Right”

/ By / Patent

Recently, in Nippon v. Controller, the Delhi High Court intervened to rein in an unduly rigid view of proof of right adopted by the Patent Office. Explaining the judgement, Dipti examines how the Court dealt with proof of right, employer–employee ownership, and the premature invocation of Section 68, and what these moves mean for patent filing practice in India. Dipti is a penultimate-year student at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar, with a strong interest in technology and intellectual property law.

Nippon v. Controller: DHC Sets the Standard for What Constitutes “Proof of Right” Read More »

The Unresolved Code: Anand Khosla, Arbitrability, and the Ghost of Rights in Rem

/ By / Copyright

In Anand Khosla v. Punam Kumari Singh, the Bombay High Court quietly retreats from the Supreme Court’s settled position on the arbitrability of IP disputes. Analysing the decision, Aditya Bhargava argues that it misapplies the rights in rem/personam distinction while considering the arbitrability of IP disputes under Vidya Drolia, and improperly legitimises the splitting of causes of action. Aditya is a fourth year law student at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore. [Long post ahead] The Unresolved Code: Anand

The Unresolved Code: Anand Khosla, Arbitrability, and the Ghost of Rights in Rem Read More »

One Chance or Two? Madras HC Bars LPAs in Patent Disputes, Deepening High Court Parity

/ By / Patent

How many chances do you really get to appeal a rejected patent application? Recent High Court decisions on the maintainability of Letters Patent Appeals suggest that the answer may depend less on law and more on geography. Taking a look at the conflicting High Court rulings on Letters Patent Appeals, Hruthika Addlagatta explains how the conflicting opinions have turned appellate access into a jurisdiction-dependent question, raising serious concerns of equality and fairness. Hruthika is a second-year law student from NALSAR

One Chance or Two? Madras HC Bars LPAs in Patent Disputes, Deepening High Court Parity Read More »

Natural Justice Without Participation? Patent Examination, Civil Consequences, and the Zydus Judgment

/ By / Patent

The Delhi High Court in Zydus v. Controller of Patents has reaffirmed a formal separation between patent examination and pre-grant opposition, characterising examination as a self-contained, non-adversarial process. While this approach emphasises procedural efficiency, it raises deeper questions about how natural justice operates once a pre-grant opposition is on record. Arshiya Gupta and Reyansh Khandelwal critically examine whether the Court’s insistence on formalism comes at the cost of substantive fairness in patent prosecution. Arshiya is a third-year law student at

Natural Justice Without Participation? Patent Examination, Civil Consequences, and the Zydus Judgment Read More »

Striking Out the Giant: Delhi HC Reaffirms Territoriality in MLB Trademark Dispute

/ By / Trademark

In Sumit Vijay v. Major League Baseball Properties, the Delhi High Court recently held that the Toronto Blue Jays did not enjoy a trans-border trademark reputation in India in 1998, noting pointedly that baseball is not a popular sport in a cricket-centric country like India. Aditya Bhargava analyses how the Court uses this context to reinforce territoriality in trademark law, demanding strict, contemporaneous evidence of Indian reputation and rejecting global fame, internet presence, and abandoned registrations as substitutes. Aditya is

Striking Out the Giant: Delhi HC Reaffirms Territoriality in MLB Trademark Dispute Read More »

Scroll to Top