Author name: SpicyIP

‘Win-Win Situation’: Compulsory Licensing Royalties Decided by Madras High Court

/ By / Others

[This guest post is authored by Devangini Rai. Devangini is a graduate of the University School of Law and Legal Studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, New Delhi. She is an IP lawyer based out of New Delhi. Though she has represented the parties involved in this dispute in the past, the views expressed here are those of the author’s alone. She has previously written for SpicyIP here.] Pronouncing yet another judgement in the compulsory licensing litigation under Section 31(1)(b) of […]

‘Win-Win Situation’: Compulsory Licensing Royalties Decided by Madras High Court Read More »

Over the Last Decade India has Spent Rs. 1,00,000 crores on Scientific Research with No Transparency: Time to Resuscitate the PUPFIP?

/ By / Innovation, Patent

We are extremely pleased to bring to our readers a guest post by Prashant Reddy T. and Saranya Ravindran on the lack of transparency on public funded R&D in India. Prashant, one of our most prolific bloggers, is an advocate and an author. Saranya is a 3rd year student at Nalsar University of Law, Hyderabad. Over the Last Decade India has Spent Rs. 1,00,000 crores on Scientific Research with No Transparency: Time to Resuscitate the PUPFIP? Prashant Reddy T. and

Over the Last Decade India has Spent Rs. 1,00,000 crores on Scientific Research with No Transparency: Time to Resuscitate the PUPFIP? Read More »

Proving ‘Bonafide’ Marriages: Del HC’s ‘Sanskari’ Interpretation of Section 52(1)(za)

/ By / Copyright

[This guest post is authored by Anjali Baskar. Anjali is a fourth-year student pursuing B.B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) from School of Law, Christ University, Bengaluru. She is keenly interested in exploring various fields in law, especially IP, Media & Entertainment.] (Unsatisfactory) Track Record vis-à-vis Section 52(1)(za) Last time the court tried to interpret Section 52(1)(za) regarding playing of copyrighted sound recordings (back in October 2022), it resulted in an ‘amicable’ settlement between the parties, being PPL (Plaintiff) and an event management

Proving ‘Bonafide’ Marriages: Del HC’s ‘Sanskari’ Interpretation of Section 52(1)(za) Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 19 – June 25)

/ By / Copyright, Geographical Indication, Patent, Trademark

Last week saw some really interesting discussions on the blog. Swaraj announced the new initiative to discuss the history of IP law on the blog and kickstarted this with informative posts from Shivam Kaushik on Indian copyright history and its entanglement with Berne Convention. Later, Lokesh wrote on a 1958 Allahabad High Court order highlighting the State’s demand for an unconditional apology for copyright infringement. We also came across the Bombay High Court’s order noting a disturbing trend of an

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

Beckoning the State: An Analysis of Open TV Inc vs. Controller of Patents and Design

/ By / Patent

[This guest post is authored by Pragya Singh and Lakshita Handa. Pragya is a Senior Resident Fellow at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, New Delhi and Lakshita is a Research Fellow at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, New Delhi. They work in the area of Legal Design and Regulation. Views expressed here are those of the authors’.] Drafting laws and policies is a rigorous process that involves multiple stages of deliberation, negotiation, and consultation between relevant stakeholders on

Beckoning the State: An Analysis of Open TV Inc vs. Controller of Patents and Design Read More »

Oops! India fell into the Berne Convention

/ By / Copyright

[This post is a part of the IP History series and is authored by Shivam Kaushik. Shivam is a 2020 law graduate from Benaras Hindu University and is presently working as a law researcher at the Delhi High Court. His introductory post on the series can be accessed here and his previous posts can be accessed here.] George Orwell was a linguistic genius! In a paper written in 1946, he observes that we often have to defend what we find

Oops! India fell into the Berne Convention Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 12 – June 18)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

Wondering what IP developments took place last week? Look no further as we present to you the SpicyIP Weekly Review, highlighting the discussions that took place on the blog along with with other IP news. This weekly review is authored by SpicyIP Intern Yashna Walia. Yashna is a fifth-year law student at UILS, Panjab University, Chandigarh. Her area of interest lies in IP and corporate law. Highlights of The Week 6 Days to SpicyIP Doctoral Fellowship Applications Deadline Attention IP

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 12 – June 18) Read More »

A Law Student’s Account of Attending the Virtual Open Houses of the CGPDTM: Part II

/ By / Trademark

[This post is authored by SpicyIP intern Anshuman Kar. Anshuman is a third year law student at National Law University, Odisha. He shares a keen interest in Patent related issues and wishes to discover more in the field of IP.] In part I of the two part post, I discussed the CGPDTM’s Open House session on Patents and Trademarks. In part II of the post, I’ll highlight the Open House Session of June 13, 2023 on trademarks and will share

A Law Student’s Account of Attending the Virtual Open Houses of the CGPDTM: Part II Read More »

A Law Student’s Account of Attending the Virtual Open Houses of the CGPDTM: Part I

/ By / Design, Patent

Everyone would agree that administration and case management are essential for the overall functioning of any judicial or quasi-judicial institution. However, as straightforward as it may sound, accomplishing these fronts is not an easy feat. Various posts on this blog have highlighted different aspects positive and negative across the years, with the most recent example being this blogpost by Mr Raja P. Selvam here. So how are the authorities responding on this front? Readers may recall that in May 2023,

A Law Student’s Account of Attending the Virtual Open Houses of the CGPDTM: Part I Read More »

An image of Nestle's logo

What is Not a Method of Treatment under Section 3(i) of the Patent Act?

/ By / Patent

[This guest post is authored by Amit Tailor. Amit is a postgraduate in Pharmaceutical Sciences from National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) and LL.B. from Faculty of Law, Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda (MSU), Vadodara. He has also completed his graduation in Pharmacy from MSU, Vadodara. Amit is a registered Patent Agent and is currently part of IP litigation team at Sun Pharmaceuticals. Amit also writes poetry with penname “કાચબો” [Kācabō – meaning tortoise/turtle] at

What is Not a Method of Treatment under Section 3(i) of the Patent Act? Read More »

Scroll to Top