Copyright

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (September 7- September 13)

After another busy week and a long weekend, here we are with the SpicyIP Weekly Review with discussions on the Delhi High Court’s evolving approach to personality rights, a closer look at the Court’s decision in the Sugammadex patent dispute. We also had posts on copyright strikes and intermediary due diligence, the ongoing Ribociclib litigation before the Kerala High Court, the paper trail in IPRS v. Hotel Appolo, and the Delhi High Court’s evolving approach towards well-known marks and TM

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

Unpacking Copyright Strikes, Safe Harbour and Due Diligence under the IT Rules : Part 2

In continuation of Part 1, this Part tests the arguments run by the Platforms where they state that – striking content upon complaint and terminating accounts with repeated complaints is due diligence which the IT Act and Rules requires. The Concept of a “Voluntary” Takedown The third proviso to Rule 3(1)(d), in force from 2021 until 15 November 2025, had three notable features. It covered removal “under clause (b) on a voluntary basis” and removal on grievances under sub-rule (2).

Unpacking Copyright Strikes, Safe Harbour and Due Diligence under the IT Rules : Part 2 Read More »

Unpacking Copyright Strikes, Safe Harbour and Due Diligence under the IT Rules : Part 1

The Delhi High Court has been recently grappling with issues concerning Copyright Strikes and takedowns by platforms, which have been necessitating Section 60 suits before the IPD Bench in Delhi.  In Saurabh Maurya v. John Doe, CS(COMM) 870 of 2026, the Instagram account of a content creator had been suspended upon copyright strikes. Inspite of restoration of the content by Meta, the Plaintiff has pressed that the mode and manner of dealing with copyright strikes by intermediary platforms is in

Unpacking Copyright Strikes, Safe Harbour and Due Diligence under the IT Rules : Part 1 Read More »

SpicyIP Tidbit- Paper Trail in IPRS v Hotel Appolo: Missing Caveat and the IPRS License

Last week, I wrote a post on a licensing quagmire covering the recent dispute between IPRS and Hotel Appolo & Tours Private Limited, which dealt with an important question of whether a hotel needs to take an IPRS license for cable TV to run in its hotel rooms. The Calcutta High Court said yes, and restrained Hotel Appolo from communicating musical and literary work owned by IPRS to guests through hotel-room television sets without a valid license, while the Supreme

SpicyIP Tidbit- Paper Trail in IPRS v Hotel Appolo: Missing Caveat and the IPRS License Read More »

Onto Clearing the Jurisdictional Clutter

Introduction “With the internet, the question of ‘territorial’ jurisdiction gets complicated largely on account of the fact that the internet is borderless.” A sentiment raised by Justice Muralidhar in 2010 still rings true in 2026 (has perhaps turned more complicated). While the journey of determining jurisdiction has taken several turns since then, it has now reached a new one with Hindustan Unilever Limited v Kwick Living (I) Private Limited. The suit, filed in the DHC, sought a permanent injunction against

Onto Clearing the Jurisdictional Clutter Read More »

Reforming Legal Deposit: Why the Jan Vishwas Amendment Falls Short

This post has been co-authored with Charan Ashok. Charan is a fifth-year B.A., LL.B (Hons) student at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore. The Delivery of Books Act, 1956 (“DB Act”), one of India’s most forgotten statutes, has been amended via the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act 2026. The said Amendment Act was notified in the e-Gazette on 8th April, 2026 and has come into force. The amendments modify the penalty provisions of the DB Act and

Reforming Legal Deposit: Why the Jan Vishwas Amendment Falls Short Read More »

Originality Without Authorship: Analysing the Copyright Office’s Decision in Thaler

In light of the Copyright Office’s refusal to register Dr. Stephen Thaler’s AI-generated artwork, holding that DABUS cannot be recognised as its author, Vikram Raj Nanda and Sumukhi Subramanian unpack the decision. They examine what it gets right on originality, authorship and ownership, and where its reasoning on human creative control and AI disclosure leaves questions unanswered. Vikram is a fourth-year student at National Law School of India University, Bengaluru, with a keen interest in IP law, Competition Law, and

Originality Without Authorship: Analysing the Copyright Office’s Decision in Thaler Read More »

Room Service, Rates, Licenses: IPRS v Hotel Appolo

You switch on the TV in a hotel room, and you have entered into a licensing quagmire! Does a hotel need to pay royalties to copyright societies for the content in the television sets of their guest rooms?  The recent dispute between IPRS and Hotel Appolo & Tours Private Limited deals with this question. The dispute began in the District Court of Darjeeling, which refused to grant IPRS an interim injunction against Hotel Appolo & Tours Private Limited. In an order

Room Service, Rates, Licenses: IPRS v Hotel Appolo Read More »

Copyright Strikes and Free Speech: Rethinking Automated Takedowns on Social Media

The Delhi High Court (“DHC”), in the past month, has seen multiple ongoing cases where social media intermediaries’ copyright strike mechanism has come into question (see here and here). With social media platforms now serving as a principal forum for public expression, and a handful of platforms controlling access to much of this speech, the consequences of automated content removal extend beyond private copyright disputes. Under such mechanisms, social media intermediaries automatically take down allegedly infringing content merely based on

Copyright Strikes and Free Speech: Rethinking Automated Takedowns on Social Media Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 24-August 30)

After an action-packed week, we have posts remembering one of the most remarkable IP administrators– Mr. P. H Kurian, on the appointment of an amicus in the Vivek Oberoi personality rights case, and on the DHC decision in Array Biopharma Inc. v. Deputy Controller of Patents. This and much more in the last Weekly Review of the month. Anything that we are missing out? Drop a comment and let us know. Highlights of the Week Remembering Mr. P. H. Kurian

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 24-August 30) Read More »

Scroll to Top