Trademark – SpicyIP

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 8-June 14)

June 15, 2026 / By SpicyIP / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

A three-pass funnel for patent searches and NLUJ’s call for papers for the latest volume of the Journal of Intellectual Property Studies feature in this edition of the SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment and let us know. [Sponsored] 300 to 30 to 5: A Three-Pass Funnel for Patent Searches Under Deadline Finding relevant patents is no longer the bottleneck. The bottleneck is deciding which of the hundreds of relevant records actually matter and […]

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 8-June 14) Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 25-June 7)

June 8, 2026 / By SpicyIP / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

[This Weekly Review is authored by Vikram Raj Nanda. Vikram Raj Nanda is a third-year student at National Law School of India University, Bengaluru, with a keen interest in IP law, Competition Law, and Arbitration. His previous posts can be accessed here.] Ending May and stepping into June, here is our latest weekly review covering developments from May 25 to June 7. This review brought a mix of contemporary IP disputes and historical reflections. From the DHC’s ruling on keyword advertising

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 25-June 7) Read More »

One more shot at Keyword Advertising……. aaaannndd Hit Wicket!

June 1, 2026 / By Akshat Agrawal / Trademark

On 22 May 2026 the Delhi High Court held that Google infringes the trademark HINDWARE by letting rival sanitary ware sellers bid on that word as a Google Ads keyword. Arul Murugan’s detailed post summarizing the dispute and holdings is here. This post is more about its critique. In a rare final judgment or decree, the HC moves in three steps – allowing to bid on a keyword is “use” of the mark; that keyword is used by Google and

One more shot at Keyword Advertising……. aaaannndd Hit Wicket! Read More »

Public Squares or Private Estates: The Delhi High Court’s Doctrinal Shift in Keyword Advertising

May 29, 2026 / By SpicyIP / Trademark

In a significant ruling in Hindware v. Grohe, the Delhi High Court drew a distinction between the use of generic marks and coined, source-identifying marks like “Hindware” as keywords, while simultaneously narrowing the scope of intermediary safe harbour for platforms such as Google. The ruling builds on precedents such as Google v. DRS Logistics and Google LLC v. MakeMyTrip (India) Pvt. Ltd, where the courts have resisted treating keyword bidding as per se trademark infringement, particularly where the marks involved

Public Squares or Private Estates: The Delhi High Court’s Doctrinal Shift in Keyword Advertising Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 18 – May 24)

May 25, 2026 / By Md Sabeeh Ahmad / Copyright, Others, Patent, Trademark

Entering the last week of May with a post tracing Indian copyright doctrine and what exactly does it protect. Post on the Delhi HC’s ruling in Bansal v. Philips, a consequential SEP/FRAND decision. And a post on the expanding and increasingly amorphous scope of personality rights in India, most recently in the case of Aniruddhacharya Ji Maharaj. Case summaries and IP developments from the country and the globe and much more in this week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 18 – May 24) Read More »

In the Aftermath of Parle: Unsettling Questions for Trade Mark Law

May 25, 2026 / By SpicyIP / Trademark

What happens when trademark law privileges filing priority over marketplace reality? The Delhi High Court’s April 10 ruling in the ‘20-20’ dispute raises difficult questions about whether registration can meaningfully coexist with decade-old goodwill, and whether identical marks can survive in the market outside the framework of honest and concurrent use. In this post, Eleen Garg examines the structural tensions the decision leaves unresolved between registry formalism, consumer protection, and passing off. Eleen is a lawyer and is practicing before

In the Aftermath of Parle: Unsettling Questions for Trade Mark Law Read More »

A Personality Too Spiritual for Satire?

May 22, 2026 / By Ambika Aggarwal / Copyright, Others, Overlaps in IP, Privacy, Trademark

I had underestimated how much of the personality rights space in India is one big, vague, wild west! The personality rights order passed by the Delhi High Court in favour of the plaintiff, Anil Kumar Tiwari (aka Aniruddhacharya Ji Maharaj) shows what happens when an already confusing jurisprudence continues to develop without guardrails: IP law protections are claimed for ineligible content; social commentary based on meme-culture collides with ambiguous private rights; and, doctrinal confusion continues to blur the scope of

A Personality Too Spiritual for Satire? Read More »

Copyright Enforcement in the Gaming Industry: Key Takeaways from the University of Geneva’s 2026 IP Conference from an Indian Observer’s Perspective

As the global gaming industry evolves far beyond entertainment into a sophisticated IP ecosystem built on software, art, music, branding, and competitive digital economies, conversations on questions of classification, cloning, and enforcement are becoming increasingly relevant. Reflecting on his experience attending the University of Geneva’s 2026 IP conference, Dhritiraj Paul Choudhary explains how jurisdictions across the world are actively rethinking copyright enforcement and classification in response to the commercial and technological realities of modern gaming, while Indian copyright jurisprudence has

Copyright Enforcement in the Gaming Industry: Key Takeaways from the University of Geneva’s 2026 IP Conference from an Indian Observer’s Perspective Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 4 – May 10)

Into the second week of May with a post on the Bombay HC’s reliance on section 65 for setting aside a refusal of atomic energy patent. Another post examining the Academy’s control on the Oscar statuette that blurs the boundaries between contract, property, and IP law. 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? Drop a comment below to let us know.

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 4 – May 10) Read More »

The $1 Oscar: Can Contract and IP Quietly Create Illusory Ownership?

The Oscar statuette may look like a personal trophy, but legally, it is something far more controlled. Through a contractual regime supported by intellectual property considerations, the Academy has ensured that an Oscar cannot become an ordinary tradable asset. Soundarya Lakshmi K examines how the Academy’s famous “$1 rule” blurs the boundaries between contract, property, and IP law, while also questioning whether Indian courts would uphold similar restrictions on ownership and transfer. Soundarya Lakshmi is a PhD Research Scholar at

The $1 Oscar: Can Contract and IP Quietly Create Illusory Ownership? Read More »

Lokesh Vyas on Searching for Indian IP History
Dear Sir, I stumbled upon this comment and could not resist responding. I have been rummaging through archival material recently…
Eleen Garg on In the Aftermath of Parle: Unsettling Questions for Trade Mark Law
Removal of trade marks from the register for non-use is contained as a ground under Section 47 of the Trade…
Eleen Garg on In the Aftermath of Parle: Unsettling Questions for Trade Mark Law
Thank you for your kind comments. Even if Parle’s mark is removed from the Register, it does not affect its…
Mustafa Safiyuddin on In the Aftermath of Parle: Unsettling Questions for Trade Mark Law
Since Avon is the prior applicant,isnt Parle's registration vulnerable to an attack for removal on the basis that under section…
Anonymous on In the Aftermath of Parle: Unsettling Questions for Trade Mark Law
Just as a granted patent may be revoked for non‑working, trademark law too should evolve to address the imbalance created…