Author name: SpicyIP

After Crocs, After Carlsberg: Does Harpic v. Spic Finally Clear the Air?

/ By / Design, Trademark

Can trademark law be used to reclaim what design law has deliberately released into the public domain? Khushi Krishania writes on the Calcutta High Court’s recent Division Bench decision in the Harpic v. Spic dispute, explaining how it revisits this uneasy intersection, but ultimately leaves its most difficult questions unresolved.  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. After Crocs, […]

After Crocs, After Carlsberg: Does Harpic v. Spic Finally Clear the Air? Read More »

Diagnosing the Diagnostic Exclusion: Have Geron and Hirotsu Resolved the Delhi High Court’s Troubles?

/ By / Patent

Section 3(i) of the Patents Act has long left the boundaries of diagnostic method exclusions uncertain, despite repeated judicial engagement. Two recent Delhi High Court decisions now offer the clearest articulation yet, bringing much-needed coherence to this evolving area of law. Shubham Thakare and Arpanjot Kaur explain these orders, highlighting how they not only clarify the legal position but also sharpen the policy tensions underlying the provision. Shubham is a third-year B.A., LL.B. (Hons.) student at the National Law School

Diagnosing the Diagnostic Exclusion: Have Geron and Hirotsu Resolved the Delhi High Court’s Troubles? Read More »

The UKSC’s “Any Hardware” Shortcut: Why Emotional Perception AI Raises More Questions Than It Answers — And Why India’s Framework Does Better

/ By / Patent

The UK Supreme Court’s decision in Emotional Perception AI Limited v Comptroller General of Patents marks a doctrinal shift in how subject-matter eligibility questions regarding computer programmes are evaluated. Irrespective of its impact, Pragati argues that the judgment is marked by a test that the Supreme Court itself chose not to apply and further contains three errors of reasoning. Pragati Upadhyay is a final-year student at the Faculty of Law, Banaras Hindu University, with a research focus on the intersection

The UKSC’s “Any Hardware” Shortcut: Why Emotional Perception AI Raises More Questions Than It Answers — And Why India’s Framework Does Better Read More »

A Course Correction That Wasn’t: The Balkrishna Order and the Persistence of Overbroad Personality Rights

/ By / Trademark

In the Acharya Balkrishna personality rights case, the Delhi High Court had an opportunity to rein in the overreach of personality rights. In this post, Shubham Thakare argues that rather than correcting course, the decision deepens an already concerning pattern of privileging reputational claims over free speech. Shubham is a third-year B.A., LL.B. (Hons.) student at the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru, with an interest in copyright and trademark law. A Course Correction That Wasn’t: The Balkrishna Order

A Course Correction That Wasn’t: The Balkrishna Order and the Persistence of Overbroad Personality Rights Read More »

SpicyIP Tidbit: When The Twist Beats The Script: Supreme Court Quashes Section 63 Proceedings Against Kahaani 2 Director

/ By / Copyright

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has quashed proceedings against Sujoy Ghosh in the Kahaani 2 dispute. Khushi Krishania writes on the Supreme Court order and explains how weak copyright infringement claims can spiral into unwarranted criminal proceedings. 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. SpicyIP Tidbit: When The Twist Beats The Script: Supreme Court Quashes Section

SpicyIP Tidbit: When The Twist Beats The Script: Supreme Court Quashes Section 63 Proceedings Against Kahaani 2 Director Read More »

Delay Enables Monopoly: How Inaction in the Opposition Proceedings at the Patent Office Undermines Access to Medicines

/ By / Patent

What happens when patent oppositions are filed, heard, but never decided? Highlighting the specific instances of prolonged delays at the Patent Office, Prathibha Sivasubramanian explains how administrative inaction is undermining a critical safeguard in patent law and how such delays can quietly enable monopolies and impact access to essential medicines. Prathibha Sivasubramanian is a Senior Researcher working with TWN. She has over a decade of experience in access to medicines, patents, and intellectual property. She has worked extensively on patent

Delay Enables Monopoly: How Inaction in the Opposition Proceedings at the Patent Office Undermines Access to Medicines Read More »

The GUI Verdict: A Celebration of Progress, or a Lament for Leadership?

/ By / Design

The Calcutta High Court’s decision in NEC Corporation marks a significant step forward for GUI design protection in India. However, beyond the celebration surrounding this development, Sachin Sharma points out that a more uncomfortable question remains—why did it take judicial intervention for this shift to occur at all? Sachin is an Associate Advocate at Sanghi & Co. An alumnus of NLU Delhi (LLM in IPR Law and Management), he is currently advancing his technical acumen through a BSc in Biotechnology.

The GUI Verdict: A Celebration of Progress, or a Lament for Leadership? Read More »

The Madras High Court’s Injunction in Sreedevi v. SaReGaMa: Was the Supreme Court Right to Stay It?

/ By / Copyright

In Sreedevi Video Corporation v. SaReGaMa India Ltd., the Madras High Court took the unusual step of allowing an injunction claim to proceed even after holding the plaintiff’s claim to copyright ownership as time-barred. The Supreme Court has since stayed this ruling, signalling concerns with this separation of remedies. Shubham Thakare examines whether an injunction can truly survive a limitation bar on ownership, and the broader implications for copyright disputes under the Copyright Act and limitation law.  Shubham is a

The Madras High Court’s Injunction in Sreedevi v. SaReGaMa: Was the Supreme Court Right to Stay It? Read More »

A New Shield for the “Strike” Era? Analysing the Delhi High Court’s Reasoning in Associated Broadcasting v. Google

/ By / Copyright

In Associated Broadcasting Company v. Google, the Delhi High Court offers a respite to content creators against copyright strikes through Section 60 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Shubham Thakare explains the decision and how it provides creators with a meaningful, if limited, tool to challenge abusive copyright strikes. Shubham is a third-year B.A., LL.B. (Hons.) student at the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru, with an interest in copyright and trademark law. A New Shield for the “Strike” Era?

A New Shield for the “Strike” Era? Analysing the Delhi High Court’s Reasoning in Associated Broadcasting v. Google Read More »

Sahyog or Suppression? The New Architecture of Intermediary Liability

/ By / Others

The recent government-led blocking of 3100+ Telegram channels marks a significant shift in India’s intermediary liability regime and censorship architecture. Priyam Mitra examines how this move and the newly created Sahyog Platform erode due process and free speech safeguards. Priyam is a third-year student at NLSIU, Bengaluru, and is deeply interested in IP and Data Protection laws. His previous posts can be accessed here. Sahyog or Suppression? The New Architecture of Intermediary Liability By Priyam Mitra Telegram has been the subject

Sahyog or Suppression? The New Architecture of Intermediary Liability Read More »

Scroll to Top