Copyright – SpicyIP

ANI v OpenAI: Not Everything an LLM Does is Copyright Infringement

April 15, 2026 / By SpicyIP / Copyright

With judgment now reserved in ANI v OpenAI, India stands at the cusp of what might be its first major judicial reckoning with the copyright implications of generative AI. The case raises foundational questions on whether AI systems merely process information in new ways or unlawfully appropriate protected expression. Vishno Sudheendra examines two of the most contested issues from the final hearings: chatbot web search functionality and memorization. Vishno is a fourth-year B.A., LL.B (Hons) student at the National Law […]

ANI v OpenAI: Not Everything an LLM Does is Copyright Infringement Read More »

From Delhi to Bombay, Music Licensing Goes Off the Beat

April 13, 2026 / By Ambika Aggarwal / Copyright

A lot has been happening with the repertoire of sound recordings that Phonographic Performance Limited (PPL) claims to own and manage. It is being used in saree showrooms, a group of 94 restaurants, high profile pubs and bars, restaurants and more. Against all these places, PPL has asserted an infringement of copyright for playing music without obtaining licenses. This has created a bizarre mix of situations. Whether PPL can exercise any legal capacity to collect licensing fees, after having surrendered

From Delhi to Bombay, Music Licensing Goes Off the Beat Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (April 6 – April 12)

April 13, 2026 / By Md Sabeeh Ahmad / Copyright, Others, Patent, Trademark

Entering the second week of April announcing the faculty line up for the SpicyIP Summer School 2026! Two-part post on the purpose of copyright in academic work in the context of Sci-Hub litigation. Another post discussing whether trademark law can be used to reclaim what design law has deliberately released into the public domain? Case summaries and IP developments from the country and the globe and much more in this week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on?

SpicyIP Weekly Review (April 6 – April 12) Read More »

(Part II) Right Without Duty: Academic Copyright, the Publisher’s Juridical Fiction, and the Case for an Ex Ante Reading of Section 52

April 8, 2026 / By SpicyIP / Copyright

Continuing the discussion on the Scihub litigation, in Part II of their post, Rishabh Upadhyay and Pragati Upadhyay turn to the August 2025 order as a vantage point to examine what the litigation has, so far, failed to do. They argue that the procedural exclusion of intervenors and the Court’s reliance on contempt have sidelined the core question of academic access under Section 52. Building on this, they make the case for reimagining fair dealing as an ex ante right

(Part II) Right Without Duty: Academic Copyright, the Publisher’s Juridical Fiction, and the Case for an Ex Ante Reading of Section 52 Read More »

(Part I) Right Without Duty: Academic Copyright, the Publisher’s Juridical Fiction, and the Case for an Ex Ante Reading of Section 52

April 8, 2026 / By SpicyIP / Copyright

The Sci-Hub litigation has dragged on for years without confronting the core question it presents: what is the purpose of copyright in academic works? As the Court circles procedural issues, Rishabh Upadhyay and Pragati Upadhyay argue that a deeper structural failure remains unaddressed, one that, in Hohfeldian terms, allows publishers to enforce claim-rights while evading their correlative duties. The result is a system that converts publicly funded research into privately controlled access. Before addressing the symptom, they argue, the law

(Part I) Right Without Duty: Academic Copyright, the Publisher’s Juridical Fiction, and the Case for an Ex Ante Reading of Section 52 Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (March 30 – April 5)

April 6, 2026 / By Md Sabeeh Ahmad / Copyright, Design, Others, Patent, Trademark

Beginning April with a rundown of the major IP developments in 2025 on SpicyIP TV! Post on two recent Delhi High Court decisions in Geron and Hirotsu clarifying the boundaries of diagnostic methods exclusion. And another post on the UK Supreme Court’s decision in Emotional Perception AI Limited v Comptroller General of Patents marking a doctrinal shift in how subject-matter eligibility questions regarding computer programmes are evaluated. Case summaries and IP developments from the country and the globe and much

SpicyIP Weekly Review (March 30 – April 5) Read More »

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

March 31, 2026 / By SpicyIP / 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 »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (March 23 – March 29)

March 30, 2026 / By Md Sabeeh Ahmad / Copyright, Design, Others, Patent, Trademark

Almost at the end of March with a post on the wonder drug Semaglutide’s patent expiry and its impact in India. Post on the Calcutta HC’s judgment removing subject-matter objections to the registration of GUIs as a design under the Designs Act. Another post on the government-led blocking of 3100+ Telegram channels marking a significant shift in India’s intermediary liability regime and censorship architecture. Case summaries and IP developments from the country and the globe and much more in this

SpicyIP Weekly Review (March 23 – March 29) Read More »

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

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

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 »