Author name: SpicyIP

(Part I) Book Review: Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia

/ By / Copyright, Geographical Indication, Patent, Trademark

“Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia“, edited by Dr. Pratyush Nath Upreti (Reader in Law at the School of Law, Queen’s University Belfast), is a timely and important intervention that brings together scholars from across the region to examine how IP law is shaped by local legal cultures, policy priorities, and socio-economic realities. Covering India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, the book speaks directly to concerns at the heart of our readership and holds particular significance for us, […]

(Part I) Book Review: Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (January 19 – January 25)

/ By / Copyright, Drug Regulation, Geographical Indication, Others, Patent, Trademark

This Weekly Review is authored by Md. Sabeeh Ahmad. Entering the final week of January with the announcement of Pre-finalists for 1st National Policy Brief Competition on IP & Innovation! A post on the recent Zydus v. ER Squibb clarifying biosimilarity is not infringement. A post on the Madras HC’s decision in Rangaraj and Kamal Hassan, shifting India’s personality-rights jurisprudence. This and much more in this week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below

SpicyIP Weekly Review (January 19 – January 25) Read More »

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 10, 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 March 10, 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 March 10, 2026] The Centre for Intellectual Property Rights (CIPR) at the National University

Call for Submissions NUALS Intellectual Property Law Review (Vol. VII) [Submit by March 10, 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 »

Scroll to Top