Design – SpicyIP

Novenco v. Xero: Do IP Cases Get a Free Pass to Bypass Sec 12-A?

November 5, 2025 / By Yogesh Byadwal / Design, Overlaps in IP, Patent, Trademark

The recent decision of the SC in Novenco Building and Industry v. Xero Energy Engineering seems to have been well taken. Comments online have showered praised over the decision for striking the right balance between procedural lapse and substantive justice. Writing on this blog for over 2 years now, I have learnt one important lesson- the outcome must never shift one’s focus away from the reasoning. To gauge how much off the mark reasoning in this judgement was, please read this- “the public […]

Novenco v. Xero: Do IP Cases Get a Free Pass to Bypass Sec 12-A? Read More »

GUI and IP: Here, There and Everywhere!

October 8, 2025 / By Bharathwaj Ramakrishnan / Copyright, Design, Others, Overlaps in IP, Patent

Image from here The Calcutta High Court (CalHC) seems poised to resolve the issue of registrability of GUI under the Designs Act (Act) once and for all. In a recent order in Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH v. Controller of Patents (Erbe, IPDAID/22/2024), CalHC has appointed Adv. Adarsh Ramanujan as amicus curiae to assist the Court on a matter, which seems to involve questions on the registrability of GUI under the Designs Act (See Adarsh’s post). This comes at a time when

GUI and IP: Here, There and Everywhere! Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 04 – August 10)

August 11, 2025 / By Md Sabeeh Ahmad / Copyright, Design, Others, Patent, Trademark

McDonald’s “Mc” prefix at the centre of a trademark battle, a new twist in the Pertuzumab biosimilar case at the Delhi HC in Roche v. Zydus, trademark and colour combination in the news again in Exide Industries v Amara Raja Energy. This and a lot more on last week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know. Highlights of the Week The “Mc”Monopoly: Is McDonald’s Building a Trademark Empire on a

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 04 – August 10) Read More »

Dura-Line v. Jain Irrigation: Where the Design’s Test Holds Water but TSM Leaks

August 9, 2025 / By SpicyIP / Design, Patent

Explaining the Delhi High Court judgement in Duraline v Jain Irrigation, Srishti Gaur highlights how it stands out for its findings on design infringement, but falls short on the obviousness analysis of the suit patent. Srishti is a third-year student at National Law University, Delhi. Her previous post can be accessed here. Dura-Line v. Jain Irrigation: Where the Design’s Test Holds Water but TSM Leaks By Srishti Gaur On 19th May, 2025, in Dura-Line India Pvt Ltd v Jain Irrigation

Dura-Line v. Jain Irrigation: Where the Design’s Test Holds Water but TSM Leaks Read More »

Holes in Reasoning? How the Judgement in Crocs v Bata Might be Misunderstood

July 31, 2025 / By SpicyIP / Design, Trademark

Taking forward the discussion on the Delhi High Court’s recent Crocs US v. Bata judgment, Priyam Mitra highlights how the Court might not have confused the concepts of design and trade dress. Priyam is a 3rd year student at the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru. He is interested in contemporary discussions surrounding intellectual property and criminal law. Holes in Reasoning? How the Judgement in Crocs v Bata Might be Misunderstood By Priyam Mitra A division bench of the Delhi High

Holes in Reasoning? How the Judgement in Crocs v Bata Might be Misunderstood Read More »

Double-Dipping via Design? Why the Crocs Judgment on Trade Dress and Design Rights Wrongly Mixes it Up

July 12, 2025 / By SpicyIP / Design, Overlaps in IP, Trademark

A division bench of the Delhi High Court recently passed a judgment addressing whether a remedy against a passing off allegation be sought for a design registered under the Designs Act. The judgement was passed in an appeal arising out of two orders of a single judge passed in Dart Industries v. Vijay Kumar Bansal and Crocs v. Bata (which was passed after clubbing together 5 suits), and relies extensively on a DHC 5 judge bench decision in Carlesber v.

Double-Dipping via Design? Why the Crocs Judgment on Trade Dress and Design Rights Wrongly Mixes it Up Read More »

Assessing the Cryogas Judgment from the lens of Section 52(1)(w)

April 30, 2025 / By SpicyIP / Copyright, Design

Highlighting the missed opportunity to interpret Section 52(1)(w) of the Copyright Act in Cryogas Equipment Private Limited v. Inox India Limited and Others, SpicyIP intern Advika Singh Malik writes on whether the provision could have been roped in by the parties in the present case or not. Advika is a third-year law student at Symbiosis Law School, Noida. She is interested in pursuing IP and tech litigation. Her previous posts can be accessed here. Assessing the Cryogas Judgment from the

Assessing the Cryogas Judgment from the lens of Section 52(1)(w) Read More »

[Part II] Cryogas Judgment: Supreme Court Stops Copyright from ‘Gaslighting’ Design

Continuing the discussion on the Supreme Court’s decision in Cryogas Equipment Private Limited v. Inox India Limited and Others, Aditya Bhargava writes on the question of “functional utility” and how it informs the two pronged test by the Court. Aditya is a third-year law student at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore. His previous posts can be accessed here. [Part II] Cryogas Judgment: Supreme Court Stops Copyright from ‘Gaslighting’ Design By Aditya Bhargava In the first part of

[Part II] Cryogas Judgment: Supreme Court Stops Copyright from ‘Gaslighting’ Design Read More »

[Part I] Cryogas Judgment: Supreme Court Stops Copyright from ‘Gaslighting’ Design

Breaking down the key parts of the Supreme Court’s decision in Cryogas Equipment Private Limited v. Inox India Limited and Others, Aditya Bhargava discusses the jurisprudence on the difference between copyright and industrial designs and the two-pronged test to distinguish between the two intellectual properties adopted by the Court in this case. In Part II of the post, he’ll discuss the question of “functional utility”. Although the post points out that the Court has not discussed Section 52(1)(w) of the

[Part I] Cryogas Judgment: Supreme Court Stops Copyright from ‘Gaslighting’ Design Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (November 25 – December 1)

December 2, 2024 / By Md Sabeeh Ahmad / Copyright, Design, Others, Patent, Trademark

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summaries of the posts on IPO’s patent application rejection of HIV drug Dolutegravir, another judgement in the long-running Section 3(k) saga, this time on the patentability of business methods and the DHC IPD’s Annual Report 2023-24. This and a lot more in this week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know. Highlights of the Week SpicyIP Tidbit: Patent Office

SpicyIP Weekly Review (November 25 – December 1) Read More »