[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 »

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

/ By / Patent

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 »

Natural Justice Without Participation? Patent Examination, Civil Consequences, and the Zydus Judgment

/ By / Patent

The Delhi High Court in Zydus v. Controller of Patents has reaffirmed a formal separation between patent examination and pre-grant opposition, characterising examination as a self-contained, non-adversarial process. While this approach emphasises procedural efficiency, it raises deeper questions about how natural justice operates once a pre-grant opposition is on record. Arshiya Gupta and Reyansh Khandelwal critically examine whether the Court’s insistence on formalism comes at the cost of substantive fairness in patent prosecution. Arshiya is a third-year law student at

Natural Justice Without Participation? Patent Examination, Civil Consequences, and the Zydus Judgment Read More »

SpicyIP Bells & Whistles: IP Events and Opportunities (12.01.2026)

/ By / Courses & Workshops, Opportunities

Welcome back to another week of Bells & Whistles! As always, we’ve rounded up a mix of developments, opportunities, and thoughtful reads from across the IP world along with a Bell of the Week that’s well worth revisiting. Bell of the Week: Sarai’s FLOSS Initiative This week’s Bell doesn’t just chime, it opens up access. We’re spotlighting the FLOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software) work of the Sarai Programme, an early and influential effort to make free software meaningful and usable

SpicyIP Bells & Whistles: IP Events and Opportunities (12.01.2026) Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (January 5 – January 11)

/ By / Copyright, Others, Patent, Trademark

More on the DPIIT Working Paper on AI and Copyright – a post on lawful access while ignoring copyright law and a two-part post arguing that Copyright law is ill-suited to address labour displacement caused by GenAI! A post critically examining the DHC’s sweeping judgement on Domain Names. This and much 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 DPIIT Working Report: Lawful

SpicyIP Weekly Review (January 5 – January 11) Read More »

DPIIT Working Report: Lawful Access while ignoring Copyright Law

/ By / Copyright, Others

When I was reading the DPIIT working paper on AI & Copyright, my mind instantly went back to Bartz v Anthropic. To be specific, I recalled the following lines from the judgement- “The downloaded pirated copies used to build a central library were not justified by a fair use.” As Ed Lee explained here, Bartz did not consider it relevant whether the pirated copies would be used for transformative use. The fact that a central library was built using pirated books disqualified Anthropic from using fair use as a defence.

DPIIT Working Report: Lawful Access while ignoring Copyright Law Read More »

Striking Out the Giant: Delhi HC Reaffirms Territoriality in MLB Trademark Dispute

/ By / Trademark

In Sumit Vijay v. Major League Baseball Properties, the Delhi High Court recently held that the Toronto Blue Jays did not enjoy a trans-border trademark reputation in India in 1998, noting pointedly that baseball is not a popular sport in a cricket-centric country like India. Aditya Bhargava analyses how the Court uses this context to reinforce territoriality in trademark law, demanding strict, contemporaneous evidence of Indian reputation and rejecting global fame, internet presence, and abandoned registrations as substitutes. Aditya is

Striking Out the Giant: Delhi HC Reaffirms Territoriality in MLB Trademark Dispute Read More »

Regulating Domain Name System: DHC’s Ex Ante Turn

/ By / Trademark

In a series of sweeping judgments on the Domain Name System, the Delhi High Court has framed anonymous and infringing domain registrations as a problem of systemic online fraud rather than routine trademark disputes. Vishno Sudheendra critically examines the Court’s wide-ranging directions, arguing that their ex ante regulatory turn is overbroad, raises serious data protection concerns, and blurs key doctrinal distinctions in domain name law. Vishno is a fourth-year B.A., LL.B (Hons) student at the National Law School of India

Regulating Domain Name System: DHC’s Ex Ante Turn Read More »

Part 2: Copyright is the Wrong Answer

/ By / Copyright

Continuing the discussion on why copyright is ill-equipped to address labour displacement caused by GenAI, Part II of Akshat’s post moves beyond copyright to explore alternative frameworks for engaging with the underlying concerns. Akshat is the founder and counsel at AASA Law Chambers. He is currently a PhD candidate at the University of Cambridge. He would like to add the following acknowledgements and disclaimer- “Credit to Profs. Oren Bracha and Talha Syed for ideas, and for “The Work of Copyright in the

Part 2: Copyright is the Wrong Answer Read More »

Part 1: Copyright is the Wrong Answer

/ By / Copyright

Against the backdrop of DPIIT’s Working Paper on AI and Copyright, Akshat argues that both the paper’s proposed framework and a broader turn to copyright are ill-suited to address labour displacement caused by GenAI and risk harming the very creators they claim to safeguard. Akshat is the founder and counsel at AASA Law Chambers. He is currently a PhD candidate at the University of Cambridge. He would like to add the following acknowledgements and disclaimer- “Credit to Profs. Oren Bracha

Part 1: Copyright is the Wrong Answer Read More »

Scroll to Top