Author name: SpicyIP

Smells like Luxury, Does it Cost a Trademark Battle?

/ By / Trademark

Recently, there has been an increase in the number of advertisements on social media for perfumes that offer the same fragrance as a luxury one at a reasonably affordable rate. If you have come across such ads and have wondered whether such use of a mark infringes the mark of the luxury brand, then you are not alone. We are pleased to bring you a guest post by our former SpicyIP Intern Ishant Jain, who shares his opinion on this […]

Smells like Luxury, Does it Cost a Trademark Battle? Read More »

The Times They Are a-Changin’? A Look at the Revised Patent Prosecution Timelines in the Draft Patent Amendment Rules

/ By / Patent

On August 23, the Draft Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2023, were published in the Gazette of India, inviting public comments by September 22. Since then, the Rules have been extensively discussed within the IP community, especially the potential impact they may have on the patent opposition mechanism. While we are working on a separate post, with comments on the different aspects of these suggested amendments, we are pleased to bring to you a post on the proposed changes to the prescribed timeline

The Times They Are a-Changin’? A Look at the Revised Patent Prosecution Timelines in the Draft Patent Amendment Rules Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 21- August 27)

/ 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 other IP news.  Highlights of the Week Toothless National Policy on Rare Diseases – Part I Among other things, the government introduced the National Policy on Rare Diseases, 2021 after the intervention by the Delhi High Court. However, as noted by Varsha Jhavar and Surbhi Nautiyal in part 1 of their 2 part

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 21- August 27) Read More »

Toothless National Policy on Rare Diseases- Part II

/ By / Drug Regulation, Patent

[This guest post is authored by our former blogger Varsha Jhavar and Surbhi Nautiyal. Varsha is a lawyer based in Delhi and is a graduate of Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur.  Surbhi is a lawyer based in Delhi and is a graduate of RGSOIPL, IIT Kharagpur. The views expressed here are those of the authors’ alone.] In Part I of the post, the authors have analysed the National Policy on Rare Diseases, 2021 (Policy) and its implementation. In Part II,

Toothless National Policy on Rare Diseases- Part II Read More »

Toothless National Policy on Rare Diseases – Part I

/ By / Drug Regulation, Patent

[This guest post is authored by our former blogger Varsha Jhavar and Surbhi Nautiyal. Varsha is a lawyer based in Delhi and is a graduate of Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur.  Surbhi is a lawyer based in Delhi and is a graduate of RGSOIPL, IIT Kharagpur. The views expressed here are those of the authors’ alone.] At the Delhi High Court’s (DHC) bidding, major developments have taken place in the rare diseases space in India. These include the introduction of

Toothless National Policy on Rare Diseases – Part I Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review ( August 14 – August 20)

/ By / Copyright, Drug Regulation, Patent, Plant Variety Protection, Trademark

Last week was full of exciting discussions on the blog. Niyati wrote on the Delhi High Court order rejecting the appeal against Pepsico’s potato plant variety revocation order. Aparajita wrote on the potential impact of the recently passed Jan Vishwas Bill, 2023. We also had a guest post by Aditya Gupta on the Delhi High Court Division Bench’s order in Google v. DRS Logistics. Anything important we’re missing out on? Drop us a comment below!  This Weekly Review is co-authored

SpicyIP Weekly Review ( August 14 – August 20) Read More »

Going Back to First Principles – A Nuanced Understanding of Infringement in Google v DRS

/ By / Trademark

We are pleased to bring to you a guest post by Aditya Gupta on the recent Delhi High Court Division Bench order in Google v. DRS. Aditya is an attorney at Ira Law and represents Google in trademark litigation relating to keyword advertising. He graduated from National Law University, Jodhpur and then pursued a masters in law from Harvard Law School. Before co-founding Ira Law, he was part of another law firm for 7 years and then an associate at

Going Back to First Principles – A Nuanced Understanding of Infringement in Google v DRS Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 7- August 13)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

Last week was full of exciting discussions on the blog. Praharsh wrote on the Delhi High Court’s Division Bench order staying the operation of the Single Judge’s direction in Vifor “Product by Process Claims” case and on the Oppositions Status Report filed by the Trademark Registry before the Delhi High Court. Mathews discussed the Delhi High Court’s order directing for strict interpretation of the PCT timelines while filing the national phase applications. We also had guest posts by Rahul Bajaj

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

Gazing at Substantive vs Procedural Rights in the Light of SAP Se vs Swiss Auto Products and Anr

/ By / Trademark

[This post is authored by SpicyIP Intern Varsha Sharma. Varsha is a 5th year law student pursuing B. A. LL.B (Hons.) from Jindal Global Law School, Sonipat.] In this post, I will be dwelling on the aspect of vested substantive rights encompassed within procedural rules, from the perspective of the recent controversy raised in SAP Se vs Swiss Auto Products and Anr. The case revolved around SAP Se (Appellant) trying to furnish new evidence according to the Trademark Rules, 2002.

Gazing at Substantive vs Procedural Rights in the Light of SAP Se vs Swiss Auto Products and Anr Read More »

Modern Foods v. Modern Snacks: A Pragmatic Approach to Trademark Infringement Suit Injunctions

/ By / Trademark

[This post is authored by our former blogger Rahul Bajaj. Rahul is an attorney at Ira Law.] When assessing whether a plaintiff in a trademark infringement suit is entitled to an interim injunction, the findings of courts on the 3 factors of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable harm are typically uniform, either supporting the grant of an injunction or its refusal. However, the July 2023 judgment of the Delhi High Court in Modern Foods v. Modern Snacks

Modern Foods v. Modern Snacks: A Pragmatic Approach to Trademark Infringement Suit Injunctions Read More »

Scroll to Top