Error 303! Error 404! Exclusive Rights Not Found – DHC Vacates Injunction in DCM Shriram v. Amreek Singh

/ By / Trademark

[This post has been authored by SpicyIP intern Aditi Agrawal. Aditi is a final-year B.A., LL.B (IPR Hons.) student at The ICFAI University, Dehradun. Her previous posts can be accessed here.] Hola, readers! Ever wondered what happens when an injunction is issued on an exaggerated sense of urgency, omitting key facts? The answer, as seen in DCM Shriram Limited v. Amreek Singh Chawla & Ors., is judicial reconsideration, vacated injunction, and a sobering reminder that equity does not reward half-truths. In […]

Error 303! Error 404! Exclusive Rights Not Found – DHC Vacates Injunction in DCM Shriram v. Amreek Singh Read More »

From Headnotes to Head-scratchers: The Functional Fallacies in Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence

/ By / Copyright

[This post is authored by Akshat Agrawal and Sneha Jain. Akshat Agrawal is a Senior Associate at Saikrishna and Associates and has previously written on the blog here. Sneha is a Partner at Saikrishna and Associates and leads their Artificial Intelligence and Law Practice. Views expressed here are those of the authors alone. Long post ahead.] The US District Court for the District of Delaware’s recent opinion in Thomson Reuters and West Publishing v. Ross Intelligence Inc. carries significant implications

From Headnotes to Head-scratchers: The Functional Fallacies in Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence Read More »

Cheroots to Cheers or Bringing IP Conversations to Wider Audiences: A SpicyIP Initiative for Vernacular Dissemination

/ By / Opportunities, Others, Overlaps in IP, Publication

Discussions over intellectual property rights are not just restricted to our textbooks but spill over to the kind of music we listen to,the medicines we intake and much much more. However, it cannot be denied that discussions around IP have been somewhat confined to the academic, legal and policy circles, navigating our mind frames like giant smoke rings from formidable cheroots of erstwhile colonial English Lords. These formidable cheroots are the technical language that shrouds IP rights (not always the

Cheroots to Cheers or Bringing IP Conversations to Wider Audiences: A SpicyIP Initiative for Vernacular Dissemination Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (February 10 – February 16)

/ By / Copyright, Others, Patent, Trademark

[Thanks to Aditi, Khushi and Sudhanshu for the case summaries] Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summary of the posts on the ANI vs OpenAI copyright case, CGPDTM’s office being moved to Delhi, and exemption under Section 107A of the Patents Act. This and a lot 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 ANI vs OpenAI: India’s

SpicyIP Weekly Review (February 10 – February 16) Read More »

New Age Office? CGPDTM To Move from Mumbai to Delhi 

/ By / Patent, Trademark

After a furor on social media platforms, the Commerce Minister has clarified that the seat of the CGPDTM is being shifted from Mumbai to New Delhi. After the move, the Mumbai office will still have the existing regional trademark and patent offices. Leaving the political banter behind this announcement aside, it is worrisome that such important announcements are made over social media platforms instead of the official website. The document about this move, which is being flouted around in social

New Age Office? CGPDTM To Move from Mumbai to Delhi  Read More »

https://i.imgflip.com/9jf0c7.jpg

Blowing Hot and Cold: DHC’s Observations on Commercialisation when Raising the Section 107A Exemption

/ By / Patent

[A big thanks to Swaraj and Praharsh for their inputs] On February 4, 2024, the Delhi High Court, in Incyte Holdings Corporation & Ors. v. Granules India Limited  (pdf), recorded a settlement in a patent dispute concerning Ruxolitinob, a drug used to manage myelofibrosis, a rare bone marrow disorder. The settlement was reached after Granules’ assurance that its activities were not for commercial use of the drugs and were covered under the Bolar type research exemption under Section 107A (for

Blowing Hot and Cold: DHC’s Observations on Commercialisation when Raising the Section 107A Exemption Read More »

ANI vs OpenAI: India’s Copyright Act is outdated. Can it Deal with New Legal Conundrums?

/ By / Others

Last month, a group of digital news publishers in India sought to join a case filed by news agency ANI in the Delhi High Court accusing the US firm OpenAI of misusing material to which they own the copyright. However, in India, OpenAI faces a major hurdle. India’s Copyright Act of 1957 and related jurisprudence favours the rights of authors and creators and was not designed to deal with the challenges posed by this emerging technology. Further, tortious claims of

ANI vs OpenAI: India’s Copyright Act is outdated. Can it Deal with New Legal Conundrums? Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (February 3 – February 9)

/ By / Copyright, Others, Patent, Trademark

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summary of the posts on the Lodha trademark dispute, the scrapping of the UGC-Care list, and the escalation of the Nayanthara-Dhanush copyright battle. This and a lot 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 Of house marks and family disputes: Taking a look at the Lodha v. Lodha TM battle  Following

SpicyIP Weekly Review (February 3 – February 9) Read More »

Logos of the Lodha and HoABL

Of house marks and family disputes: Taking a look at the Lodha v. Lodha TM battle 

/ By / Trademark

Macrotech Developers (formerly known as ‘Lodha Developers’) filed a trademark infringement suit against the ‘House of Abhinandan Lodha’ (HoABL). Macrotech, in the suit, has sought an injunction against HoABL from using the TM ‘Lodha’ to prevent confusion among consumers. Further, Macrotech has sought Rs. 5000 cr. in damages. Abhishek Lodha (CEO, Macrotech Developers), in this interview, has said that the suit is to ensure that the consumers are not confused that any other developer using the Lodha name is associated with Macrotech or

Of house marks and family disputes: Taking a look at the Lodha v. Lodha TM battle  Read More »

Whose Copyright Stands Tall? Looking at Saregama India v Vels Film International

/ By / Copyright

Explaining the recent Delhi High Court order in Saregama v. Vels on copyright ownership over the song En Iniya Pon Nilave, Tanishka Goswami writes on the implication of the decision on the composers. Tanishka is an advocate at the High Court of MP. She graduated from National Law University, Delhi in 2023 & enjoys reading and writing on copyright laws. Her previous posts can be found here. Whose Copyright Stands Tall? Looking at Saregama India v Vels Film International By Tanishka

Whose Copyright Stands Tall? Looking at Saregama India v Vels Film International Read More »

Scroll to Top