SpicyIP Tidbit: Médecins Sans Frontières suit against Dharma Productions for Jigra scene

/ By / Trademark

In an interesting development that caught my eye (coincidentally after reading Shravya’s post here on Mediation in IP), Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) has filed a suit against Dharma Production for using the MSF trademark in a scene of the movie Jigra. MSF, commonly also known as Doctors without Borders, is involved in humanitarian medical care and has long been an advocate for ‘access to medicines’. Interestingly, in October this year Adar Poonawalla (CEO of the Serum Institute of India) acquired […]

SpicyIP Tidbit: Médecins Sans Frontières suit against Dharma Productions for Jigra scene Read More »

SpicyIP Tidbit: Mankind v. A2 Lifesciences: Resorting to Mediation to Resolve IP Disputes

/ By / Trademark

[This post is authored by SpicyIP intern Shravya Pandre. Shravya is a third year BA.LLB. Hons. student at The National Academy of Legal Studies and Research, Hyderabad. Her previous post can be accessed here.] While interim injunctions seem to be the go-to remedy in India against IP infringements, negotiation as a means to resolve IP disputes rarely gets the same traction. The recent Delhi High Court order in Mankind Pharma Ltd. v. A2 Lifesciences & Anr. (pdf) is an apt

SpicyIP Tidbit: Mankind v. A2 Lifesciences: Resorting to Mediation to Resolve IP Disputes Read More »

Formulation/Composition Claims and Section 3(d): Analyzing the Utidelone Pre-grant Opposition Order

/ By / Patent

In light of the recent UTIDELONE patent grant order by the Indian Patent Office, Bharathwaj Ramakrishnan analyses the tactic to present a pharmaceutical invention as a composition to overcome Section 3(d) scrutiny and how this could be bad in law. Bharathwaj is a 3rd year LLB Student at RGSOIPL, IIT Kharagpur, and loves books and IP. His previous posts can be accessed here. Formulation/Composition Claims and Section 3(d): Analyzing the Utidelone Pre-grant Opposition Order By Bharathwaj Ramakrishnan “Name of the game

Formulation/Composition Claims and Section 3(d): Analyzing the Utidelone Pre-grant Opposition Order Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (December 9 – December 15)

/ By / Others

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summaries of the posts on unreasoned patent grants and rejections, the One Nation One Subscription initiative by the government, and the DHC order on missing reasons for ex-parte injunctions. 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 Part I: Unreasoned Patent Grants and Rejections: Taking a Look at

SpicyIP Weekly Review (December 9 – December 15) Read More »

Call for Submissions: NALSAR’s Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (IJIPL) Vol. 15 [Submissions by March 31, 2025]

/ By / Opportunities

We are pleased to announce that  NALSAR’s Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (IJIPL) is inviting submissions for its 15th Volume. The last date for submission of entries is March 31, 2025.  For further details, please read their call and the guidelines below- Call for Papers: The Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (Vol.15) The Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (IJIPL) is the flagship intellectual property law journal of NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad. IJIPL is India’s first student-run journal that is wholly

Call for Submissions: NALSAR’s Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law (IJIPL) Vol. 15 [Submissions by March 31, 2025] Read More »

Comments Invited to Revise the ABS Guidelines, 2014 (December 17)

/ By / Biological Diversity

The National Biodiversity Authority has invited comments to revise the Guidelines on Access to Biological Resources and Associated Knowledge and Benefits Sharing Regulations, 2014 better known as the ABS Guidelines, 2014. The notice has cited the recent amendments to the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (see here) and Biological Diversity Rules, 2004 (see here) as the reason to revise the 2014 guidelines but does not specify who the signatory officer is or when the notice was published online. The comments are

Comments Invited to Revise the ABS Guidelines, 2014 (December 17) Read More »

Is One Nation One Subscription A Panacea for the Gap in Widespread Access to Knowledge?

/ By / Copyright, Innovation

[This post is co-authored with SpicyIP intern Shravya Pandre. Shravya is a third year BA.LLB. Hons. student at The National Academy of Legal Studies and Research, Hyderabad.]  By now most of our readers would have heard about the ambitious “One Nation One Subscription” (ONOS) initiative of the government. Approved on November 25 by the Union Cabinet, the momentous initiative aims to ensure access to scholarly works to nearly 1.8 Crore students, faculty members, researchers, and scientists (including the ones in

Is One Nation One Subscription A Panacea for the Gap in Widespread Access to Knowledge? Read More »

SpicyIP Tidbit: Reasons be Recorded While Granting Ex-parte Injunctions, held the Delhi High Court

/ By / Others

Recently, Praharsh shared an interesting order, Kailash Kumar Jain v. Kundan Electro, with me concerning ex-parte proceedings—where the Delhi High Court called out non-recording of reasons by the trial court for granting ex-parte injunctions, setting the suit afresh. While there have been past instances where courts have criticized the unreasoned granting of interim ex-parte injunctions (see, e.g., here), the present case places special emphasis on this issue. Examining the current law and cases on ex-parte injunctions, the case raises the

SpicyIP Tidbit: Reasons be Recorded While Granting Ex-parte Injunctions, held the Delhi High Court Read More »

Role of Family Courts in Intellectual Property Disputes: Looking at the Calluna Dispute before the Kerala High Court

/ By / Trademark

[This post has been authored by SpicyIP intern Kaustubh Chakrabarti. Kaustubh is a second year BA.LLB. (Hons.) student at Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur.] On 10th October 2024, an intriguing question regarding jurisdiction of a family court over a trademark infringement claim came up (pdf) in front of a division bench of the Kerala High Court comprising of Justices Devan Ramachandran and M.B. Snehalatha. The petitioner, Mr. C.K. Chandran was seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the respondent, his spouse,

Role of Family Courts in Intellectual Property Disputes: Looking at the Calluna Dispute before the Kerala High Court Read More »

Part II: Unreasoned Patent Grants and Rejections: Taking a Look at the Division Application Filing Fiasco in the BASF SE Case

/ By / Patent

[The post is co-authored by Praharsh and Sabeeh.] In light of the controversy surrounding the rejection of BASF’s divisional application, in Part I, we looked at the order granting a patent to its parent application. A few hours after this grant order, BASF co-incidentally filed its divisional application which was rejected by the Patent Office, despite BASF’s request to condone the delay (pdf). Interestingly, the Patent Office still proceeded with examining BASF’s application despite the delay in filing the divisional

Part II: Unreasoned Patent Grants and Rejections: Taking a Look at the Division Application Filing Fiasco in the BASF SE Case Read More »

Scroll to Top