The WHO Pandemic Agreement: A Contested Step Beyond Doha

/ By / Patent

Taking a look at the recent Pandemic Treaty, Dr. Siddarth Jain explains how its provisions differ—both positively and negatively—from the 2001 Doha Declaration. Siddarth holds a PhD from the School of Social Sciences, Centre for Studies in Science Policy, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, and is interested in IP, technology transfer, and innovation studies. He was also a participant in the recently concluded SpicyIP Summer School 2025, where this was one of the many topics of discussion that had come […]

The WHO Pandemic Agreement: A Contested Step Beyond Doha Read More »

Procedure, Pleadings, and Platforms: DHC’s Stay in Amazon v. Lifestyle

/ By / Trademark

Recently, a DB of the DHC passed a stay on the Amazon v. Lifestyle decision granting  ₹339 crore in damages and costs on Amazon Technologies, Inc for trademark infringement. Khushi Jain and Vishno Sudheendra explain the DB judgement, discussing how it recalibrates the contours of licensor and e-commerce liability in trademark infringement disputes. Khushi is a fourth-year B.A., LL.B (Hons) student at the National Law University Delhi with a keen interest in the intersection of law and policy. Vishno is

Procedure, Pleadings, and Platforms: DHC’s Stay in Amazon v. Lifestyle Read More »

Comments on Revised Draft CRI Guidelines 2025- Version 2.0, really? 

/ By / Patent

On 26 June, the CGPDTM issued a public notice inviting comments on the “Revised Draft CRI Guidelines 2025, Version 2.0.” Earlier, in May 2025, we had submitted our comments on the previous edition of the CRI guidelines. (here) This time around, the CGPDTM had organised in-person stakeholder meetings to discuss the comments received for the first version of these guidelines. Bharathwaj Ramakrishnan, our prolific blogger, had attended one of these meeting in Chennai on our behalf.  To CGPDTM’s credit, organising stakeholder meetings goes a long way in increasing transparency

Comments on Revised Draft CRI Guidelines 2025- Version 2.0, really?  Read More »

GI Protection in High Spirits in the Chile-Peru Pisco Saga

/ By / Geographical Indication, Others

Times are spicy for GI cases! After the Prada-Kolhapuri Chappal GI fiasco, we present to you, the Delhi High Court’s (“the Court”) judgment in Asociacion De Productores De Pisco A.G vs Union of India. At the centre here is Pisco, a popular grape brandy produced using unique methods in Chile and Peru for over five centuries. The challenge was brought by an association of Chilean Pisco producers, to an order passed by the IPAB in November 2018 in favor of

GI Protection in High Spirits in the Chile-Peru Pisco Saga Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (July 7 – July 13)

/ By / Copyright, Others, Patent, Trademark

Is there a distinction between parody and satire? – A post on the different positions by Indian and US Courts. A post on the Delhi HC’s possibly wrong interpretation in equating design with trade dress and another on the trademark renewal notices: a lifeline or potential loophole? This and much more in our weekly roundup of our blog posts, case summaries, and top IP developments in the country and the world. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment

SpicyIP Weekly Review (July 7 – July 13) Read More »

Trademark Renewal Notices: A Lifeline or a Potential Loophole for Expired Trademarks?

/ By / Trademark

In light of the recent DHC Rajesh Kumar Mittal v. Registrar of TM judgement, directing the Trademark Registry to renew a lapsed trademark, Akshay Ajayakumar writes on why courts should have cautious approach towards such restorations. He explains inter alia such restorations congest the trademark register, results in legal ambiguity, and imposes undue burden on the Registry. Akshay is a graduate of National Law University, Jodhpur, and has an LL.M in IP and Competition Law from the Munich Intellectual Property

Trademark Renewal Notices: A Lifeline or a Potential Loophole for Expired Trademarks? Read More »

Exploring the Parody-Satire Distinction in light of the Kunal Kamra Saga

/ By / Copyright

Is there a distinction between parody and satire? Kevin Preji and Vishno Sudheendra discuss this question in light of the different positions of the courts in India and the US, keeping the Kunal Kamra-T-series copyright controversy as the case study. Kevin is a fourth-year law student at NLSIU Bangalore. His passion lies in understanding the intersection of economics and public health with intellectual property rights. Vishno is also a fourth-year B.A., LL.B (Hons) student at the National Law School of India

Exploring the Parody-Satire Distinction in light of the Kunal Kamra Saga Read More »

Sip, Sample, Sue? Budweiser’s One-Second Spin Through Copyright Foam

/ By / Copyright

The Budweiser’s recent one second ad campaign has drawn legal scrutiny across the board on the issues of copyright infringement and licensing. Sharing his thoughts on the controversy, S. Sri Ganesh Prasad analyses it from the lens of originality, protectability of fragments, and market substitution. Ganesh is a third-year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) student at the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (WBNUJS), Kolkata. He is interested in a wide range of private and commercial law subjects, including arbitration, intellectual

Sip, Sample, Sue? Budweiser’s One-Second Spin Through Copyright Foam Read More »

Double-Dipping via Design? Why the Crocs Judgment on Trade Dress and Design Rights Wrongly Mixes it Up

/ By / Design, Overlaps in IP, Trademark

A division bench of the Delhi High Court recently passed a judgment addressing whether a remedy against a passing off allegation be sought for a design registered under the Designs Act. The judgement was passed in an appeal arising out of two orders of a single judge passed in Dart Industries v. Vijay Kumar Bansal and Crocs v. Bata (which was passed after clubbing together 5 suits), and relies extensively on a DHC 5 judge bench decision in Carlesber v.

Double-Dipping via Design? Why the Crocs Judgment on Trade Dress and Design Rights Wrongly Mixes it Up Read More »

Delhi HC Orders ₹290 Cr Interim Deposit In A Patent Dispute

/ By / Patent

The Delhi High Court recently passed an order directing a Korean telecom equipment manufacturer to deposit INR 290 Crore as an interim security in a patent infringement dispute filed by a Canadian company. Taking a look at the decision, S. Sri Ganesh Prasad explains the Court’s rationale and looks at some of the other previous decisions where the courts have directed for such an interim relief. Ganesh is a third-year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) student at the West Bengal National University

Delhi HC Orders ₹290 Cr Interim Deposit In A Patent Dispute Read More »

Scroll to Top