Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 19 – June 25)

/ By / Copyright, Geographical Indication, Patent, Trademark

Last week saw some really interesting discussions on the blog. Swaraj announced the new initiative to discuss the history of IP law on the blog and kickstarted this with informative posts from Shivam Kaushik on Indian copyright history and its entanglement with Berne Convention. Later, Lokesh wrote on a 1958 Allahabad High Court order highlighting the State’s demand for an unconditional apology for copyright infringement. We also came across the Bombay High Court’s order noting a disturbing trend of an […]

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

Year 1958 and Government’s “Nadir-shahi Firman” Over Copyright Infringement!

/ By / Copyright

While glancing through some initial Indian copyright cases after independence, I chanced upon a quirky 1958 case from Allahabad High Court and thought of sharing it with our readers. So, the year was 1958, a curious case came before the Allahabad High Court – J.N. Bhagga And Ors. vs State (AIR 1959 All 492). It was an appeal by the State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) against the order of the Additional District Magistrate Allahabad acquitting the respondents of the offense

Year 1958 and Government’s “Nadir-shahi Firman” Over Copyright Infringement! Read More »

Beckoning the State: An Analysis of Open TV Inc vs. Controller of Patents and Design

/ By / Patent

[This guest post is authored by Pragya Singh and Lakshita Handa. Pragya is a Senior Resident Fellow at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, New Delhi and Lakshita is a Research Fellow at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, New Delhi. They work in the area of Legal Design and Regulation. Views expressed here are those of the authors’.] Drafting laws and policies is a rigorous process that involves multiple stages of deliberation, negotiation, and consultation between relevant stakeholders on

Beckoning the State: An Analysis of Open TV Inc vs. Controller of Patents and Design Read More »

Oops! India fell into the Berne Convention

/ By / Copyright

[This post is a part of the IP History series and is authored by Shivam Kaushik. Shivam is a 2020 law graduate from Benaras Hindu University and is presently working as a law researcher at the Delhi High Court. His introductory post on the series can be accessed here and his previous posts can be accessed here.] George Orwell was a linguistic genius! In a paper written in 1946, he observes that we often have to defend what we find

Oops! India fell into the Berne Convention Read More »

Searching for Indian IP History

/ By / Copyright

While the Indian IP landscape continues to grow at a breakneck speed, it’s “interesting” to see how little of any discussion is rooted in facts and figures. Indeed, the ‘fact vs faith’ approach is something that Prof Basheer had written about several times in the past (eg here and here). As I’ve noted in the past, this is not limited to India, however, there’s a peculiar problem for those who want to pursue more ‘fact-based’ research on IP in India

Searching for Indian IP History Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 12 – June 18)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

Wondering what IP developments took place last week? Look no further as we present to you the SpicyIP Weekly Review, highlighting the discussions that took place on the blog along with with other IP news. This weekly review is authored by SpicyIP Intern Yashna Walia. Yashna is a fifth-year law student at UILS, Panjab University, Chandigarh. Her area of interest lies in IP and corporate law. Highlights of The Week 6 Days to SpicyIP Doctoral Fellowship Applications Deadline Attention IP

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

A Law Student’s Account of Attending the Virtual Open Houses of the CGPDTM: Part II

/ By / Trademark

[This post is authored by SpicyIP intern Anshuman Kar. Anshuman is a third year law student at National Law University, Odisha. He shares a keen interest in Patent related issues and wishes to discover more in the field of IP.] In part I of the two part post, I discussed the CGPDTM’s Open House session on Patents and Trademarks. In part II of the post, I’ll highlight the Open House Session of June 13, 2023 on trademarks and will share

A Law Student’s Account of Attending the Virtual Open Houses of the CGPDTM: Part II Read More »

A Law Student’s Account of Attending the Virtual Open Houses of the CGPDTM: Part I

/ By / Design, Patent

Everyone would agree that administration and case management are essential for the overall functioning of any judicial or quasi-judicial institution. However, as straightforward as it may sound, accomplishing these fronts is not an easy feat. Various posts on this blog have highlighted different aspects positive and negative across the years, with the most recent example being this blogpost by Mr Raja P. Selvam here. So how are the authorities responding on this front? Readers may recall that in May 2023,

A Law Student’s Account of Attending the Virtual Open Houses of the CGPDTM: Part I Read More »

An image of Nestle's logo

What is Not a Method of Treatment under Section 3(i) of the Patent Act?

/ By / Patent

[This guest post is authored by Amit Tailor. Amit is a postgraduate in Pharmaceutical Sciences from National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) and LL.B. from Faculty of Law, Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda (MSU), Vadodara. He has also completed his graduation in Pharmacy from MSU, Vadodara. Amit is a registered Patent Agent and is currently part of IP litigation team at Sun Pharmaceuticals. Amit also writes poetry with penname “કાચબો” [Kācabō – meaning tortoise/turtle] at

What is Not a Method of Treatment under Section 3(i) of the Patent Act? Read More »

RIPL v. PhonePe: Delhi HC Clarifies the Convoluted Position over Technicalities of Rectification Application

/ By / Trademark

[This post is authored by SpicyIP intern Shikhar Chauhan. Shikhar is a second-year law student at NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad. He shares a keen interest in developments concerning IP Law.] On May 18th of this year, the Delhi High Court in a long running trademark dispute between Resilient (proprietors of Bharatpe and Postpe) and Phonepe (see here and here)  passed an order clarifying that intra court appeals arising out of Single Judge’s order rejecting a rectification petition, can be

RIPL v. PhonePe: Delhi HC Clarifies the Convoluted Position over Technicalities of Rectification Application Read More »

Scroll to Top