Call for Submissions NUALS Intellectual Property Law Review (Vol. VII) [Submit by March 1, 2026]

/ By / Opportunities, Publication

The Centre for Intellectual Property Rights (CIPR) at the National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS), Kochi, is inviting submissions for the NUALS Intellectual Property Law Review (Vol. VII). Interested authors can send their submissions by March 1, 2026. For more details, please read their call for papers below. Call for Submissions: NUALS Intellectual Property Law Review (Vol. VII) [Submit by March 1, 2026] The Centre for Intellectual Property Rights (CIPR) at the National University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS), […]

Call for Submissions NUALS Intellectual Property Law Review (Vol. VII) [Submit by March 1, 2026] Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (January 12 – January 18)

/ By / Copyright, Others, Patent, Trademark

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

/ By / Patent

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

/ By / Patent

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 »

SpicyIP Tidbit: Caution! Trade Marks Protection through Online Service Providers

/ By / Others, Trademark

Through a public notice issued on January 7, 2026, the Office of the Controller General Patents, Designs & Trade Marks (“CGPDTM”) cautioned popular online registration services including “makeinindia.com”, “cleartax.in”, “startupwala.com” against advertising and solicitation of prospective applicants or clients through digital and online platforms. These entities reach out to stakeholders, offering assistance in trademark registration (brand names, logos, slogans, icons, etc.) through online services. The CGPDTM clarified that the abovementioned entities are neither “Registered Trade Mark Agents” nor “Advocates” under

SpicyIP Tidbit: Caution! Trade Marks Protection through Online Service Providers Read More »

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

/ By / Patent

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 »

The Unresolved Code: Anand Khosla, Arbitrability, and the Ghost of Rights in Rem

/ By / Copyright

In Anand Khosla v. Punam Kumari Singh, the Bombay High Court quietly retreats from the Supreme Court’s settled position on the arbitrability of IP disputes. Analysing the decision, Aditya Bhargava argues that it misapplies the rights in rem/personam distinction while considering the arbitrability of IP disputes under Vidya Drolia, and improperly legitimises the splitting of causes of action. Aditya is a fourth year law student at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore. [Long post ahead] The Unresolved Code: Anand

The Unresolved Code: Anand Khosla, Arbitrability, and the Ghost of Rights in Rem Read More »

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

/ By / Patent

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 »

Online Symposium on the Book “IP Debates in South Asia” (17th Jan)

/ By / Event, Others, Publication

In one of the first works of its kind, a recent publication edited by the wonderful Dr Pratyush Nath Upreti (Queens University, Belfast), brought together a number of IP scholars to examine the IP developments and debates that have taken place in South Asia. As Prof Gangjee notes in the forward, “a central aim of this book is to document current initiatives and imagine future possibilities for creating more equitable and inclusive intellectual property regimes across the regime”. He emphasises

Online Symposium on the Book “IP Debates in South Asia” (17th Jan) Read More »

[Tidbit] Will Azure Hospitality Saga Impact the PPL-Passcode Litigation?

/ By / Copyright

Image from here. The story of Phonographic Performance Limited (PPL) and its tryst with the Copyright Society framework continues. Readers will recall that in April 2025, a division bench (DB) of the Delhi HC in Azure v PPL had held that PPL cannot issue or grant licences for sound recordings without registering itself as a copyright society or becoming a member of any registered copyright society (Interested folks can refer to my detailed post for the ruling’s analysis). In its directions,

[Tidbit] Will Azure Hospitality Saga Impact the PPL-Passcode Litigation? Read More »

Scroll to Top