Patent

(Part III) Book Review: Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia

Reviewing Part III of the book- “Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia”, edited by Dr. Pratyush Nath Upreti, Prof. Ishupal Singh Kang engages with how institutions, courts, and practices shape IP governance beyond doctrinal boundaries, bringing questions of gender, access, expertise, and social justice into the frame. Reading the chapters in conversation rather than isolation, Prof. Kang reflects on innovation-centric assumptions, the politics of IP expertise, and the role of South Asian historical narratives in re-imagining IP law and its […]

(Part III) Book Review: Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia Read More »

(Part II) Book Review: Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia

Continuing the discussion on the book- “Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia“, edited by Dr. Pratyush Nath Upreti, Akshat Agrawal reviews part II of the book (Intellectual Property Developments in South Asia) and examines how South Asian IP regimes are shaped and constrained by the imperative to align with TRIPS, often at a high developmental, cultural, and public-interest cost. Discussing the chapters focusing on Sri Lanka, India, Nepal, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, Akshat highlights how legal transplants, trade pressures, and local

(Part II) Book Review: Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia Read More »

(Part I) Book Review: Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia

“Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia“, edited by Dr. Pratyush Nath Upreti (Reader in Law at the School of Law, Queen’s University Belfast), is a timely and important intervention that brings together scholars from across the region to examine how IP law is shaped by local legal cultures, policy priorities, and socio-economic realities. Covering India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan, the book speaks directly to concerns at the heart of our readership and holds particular significance for us,

(Part I) Book Review: Intellectual Property Debates in South Asia Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (January 19 – January 25)

This Weekly Review is authored by Md. Sabeeh Ahmad. Entering the final week of January with the announcement of Pre-finalists for 1st National Policy Brief Competition on IP & Innovation! A post on the recent Zydus v. ER Squibb clarifying biosimilarity is not infringement. A post on the Madras HC’s decision in Rangaraj and Kamal Hassan, shifting India’s personality-rights jurisprudence. This and much more in this week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below

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

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (January 12 – January 18)

A post critiquing the Bombay HC judgment in Anand Khosla on the arbitrability of IP disputes. Does the DHC’s reaffirmation in Zydus v. Controller that patent examination and pre-grant opposition operate in different parallel raise concerns about natural justice? A post discussing the same. And another post examining DHC’s decision in Pearl Engineering v. Philips concerning stay of money decrees. This and much more in this week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below

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

Biosimilarity is not Infringement- Full Stop

On Monday, a DB of the DHC allowed Zydus to manufacture and market a biosimilar of the drug Nivolumab, marketed as Opdivo. The DB order is well-reasoned, providing a clear demarcation between infringement analysis and biosimilarity. Nivolumab, which is at the centre of the controversy, is an anti-cancer medication which increases the ability of the immune system to kill cancer cells.(here) I have previously explain how this drug works here. The EMA website states that Opdivo has “has been shown to benefit patients

Biosimilarity is not Infringement- Full Stop Read More »

Staying the Numbers: Damages Quantification and the Limits of “Exceptionality” after Lifestyle

The Delhi High Court’s decision to stay execution of a damages decree in M/s Pearl Engineering v. Koninklijke Philips N.V. raises uneasy questions about when money decrees can be put on hold. Aafreen Saraf argues that by relying on doubts in damages computation, the Court stretches the Supreme Court’s narrow “exceptional cases” standard reaffirmed in Lifestyle Equities v. Amazon Technologies. Aafreen is a third-year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) student at the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (WBNUJS), Kolkata. She

Staying the Numbers: Damages Quantification and the Limits of “Exceptionality” after Lifestyle Read More »

Nippon v. Controller: DHC Sets the Standard for What Constitutes “Proof of Right”

Recently, in Nippon v. Controller, the Delhi High Court intervened to rein in an unduly rigid view of proof of right adopted by the Patent Office. Explaining the judgement, Dipti examines how the Court dealt with proof of right, employer–employee ownership, and the premature invocation of Section 68, and what these moves mean for patent filing practice in India. Dipti is a penultimate-year student at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar, with a strong interest in technology and intellectual property law.

Nippon v. Controller: DHC Sets the Standard for What Constitutes “Proof of Right” Read More »

InPASS New Feature Update: Download Final Granted Patent Specifications with Ease! 

Patent professionals and researchers would know the pain of correctly identifying the final granted claims for an invention. Previously, one had to examine the written submissions and the amendments made by the applicant, along with the controller’s order, to identify the final granted claims post-examination. One can only imagine how difficult the same exercise would be for someone unfamiliar with Patent Office procedures and patent law in general.  To address this pain point and improve legibility of patent documents, the

InPASS New Feature Update: Download Final Granted Patent Specifications with Ease!  Read More »

One Chance or Two? Madras HC Bars LPAs in Patent Disputes, Deepening High Court Parity

How many chances do you really get to appeal a rejected patent application? Recent High Court decisions on the maintainability of Letters Patent Appeals suggest that the answer may depend less on law and more on geography. Taking a look at the conflicting High Court rulings on Letters Patent Appeals, Hruthika Addlagatta explains how the conflicting opinions have turned appellate access into a jurisdiction-dependent question, raising serious concerns of equality and fairness. Hruthika is a second-year law student from NALSAR

One Chance or Two? Madras HC Bars LPAs in Patent Disputes, Deepening High Court Parity Read More »

Scroll to Top