Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 12-August 18)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summary of the posts on Orders passed by contractual staff of Trademarks Registry, DHC’s recent order on 3(k), and Safe Distance Rule. This and much more in this SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know.  Highlights of the Week Close to 2 years of Trademark Registry Orders Under Scrutiny After Questions of Illegal Delegation of Examiner Duties Arise Two […]

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 12-August 18) Read More »

Playing from a “Safe Distance”: Analysing the Rule, its Roots and Application in India

/ By / Trademark

Recently one of the parties in R.C. Plasto Tanks and Pipes Pvt. Ltd. v. Ganesh Gouri Industries & Anr. referred to the “Safe Distance Rule”. Discussing what this rule is and its origin, we are pleased to bring to you this post by SpicyIP intern Samridhi Chugh. Samridhi is a final-year student at the Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, and a graduate in Journalism from Lady Shri Ram College for Women. With a passion for the

Playing from a “Safe Distance”: Analysing the Rule, its Roots and Application in India Read More »

https://i.imgflip.com/8yfwz5.jpg

(GM) Mustard and More: Analysing the SC’s Decision in Gene Campaign v. UOI

/ By / Innovation

On 23 July 2024, the Supreme Court  (SC) delivered a split verdict on the commercial sale of Genetically Modified Mustard (GM Mustard) in India in the case of Gene Campaign vs. Union of India and Others. A Division Bench (DB) comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Sanjay Karol issued two separate judgments. Justice BV Nagarathna quashed the approval granted by the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) and the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC), while Justice Sanjay Karol

(GM) Mustard and More: Analysing the SC’s Decision in Gene Campaign v. UOI Read More »

CGPDTM Issues Order to Re-validate TM Orders Passed by Contractual Staff 

/ By / Trademark

In the aftermath of the very recent controversy surrounding the reports of Trademark orders being passed by contractual staff employed through the Quality Council of India (QCI), the CGPDTM has issued an office order (dt. August 13, 2024) explaining the mechanism to revalidate these orders. This office order comes in light of the DPIIT’s direction to form a committee of officers for the above exercise, as pointed out by Sabeeh in his post above.  As per the devised mechanism, two

CGPDTM Issues Order to Re-validate TM Orders Passed by Contractual Staff  Read More »

The Curious Case of Composers and Copyright – Ilaiyaraaja’s Copyright Dispute with ‘Manjummel Boys’ Makers

/ By / Copyright

In light of the ongoing copyright dispute between legendary composer Ilaiyaraaja and makers of the hit Malayalam movie “Manjummel Boys” we are pleased to bring to you this tidbit by SpicyIP intern Tejas Misra. Tejas explains what the dispute was about and shares his quick take on the rights of composers under the Indian Copyright Act. Tejas is a third-year law student at National Law University, Delhi, and is interested in the evolution of IPR law and its growth in

The Curious Case of Composers and Copyright – Ilaiyaraaja’s Copyright Dispute with ‘Manjummel Boys’ Makers Read More »

Copyright Violations in Derivative Works and Music Sampling – The Case of “Chuttamalle”

/ By / Copyright

On the recent controversy regarding similarity between Anirudh’s latest song “Chuttamalle” and Chamath Sangeeth’s “Manike Maga Hithe”, we are pleased to bring to you this tidbit by SpicyIP Intern Tejas Misra. Tejas is a third-year law student at National Law University, Delhi, and is interested in the evolution of IPR law and its growth in India. His previous posts can be accessed here. Copyright Violations in Derivative Works and Music Sampling – The Case of “Chuttamalle” By Tejas Misra Recently,

Copyright Violations in Derivative Works and Music Sampling – The Case of “Chuttamalle” Read More »

A person sitting behind a table with a poster saying "you cant change my mind"

DHC and 3(k): This time using the ‘Technical effect’ Test

/ By / Innovation, Patent

The Delhi High Court, in AB Initio v. Assistant Controller, allowed the maintainability of divisional applications, which were rejected by the Controller u/s. 3(k) for being a computer program per se. The DHC, in this judgement, continued with its restrictive interpretation of 3(k), narrowing the scope of inventions which are excluded u/s. 3(k). The Court, having wide options of ‘technical’ tests in its arsenal, applied the ‘technical effect’ test in this case. In this post, apart from discussing the background and arguments raised in

DHC and 3(k): This time using the ‘Technical effect’ Test Read More »

Missed Hearings Do Not Equal Abandonment: Star Scientific Limited v. The Controller Of Patents And Design

/ By / Patent

Recently on July 30, the DHC clarified that non appearance of an applicant in a hearing cannot result in the Controller deeming their application as abandoned. Discussing this order and noting its importance vis a vis the right to be heard, we are pleased to bring to you this post by SpicyIP Intern Aditi Bansal. Aditi is a fourth year law student studying at OP Jindal Global University. She is incredibly passionate towards IP laws and its workings. Her previous

Missed Hearings Do Not Equal Abandonment: Star Scientific Limited v. The Controller Of Patents And Design Read More »

Close to 2 years of Trademark Registry Orders Under Scrutiny After Questions of Illegal Delegation of Examiner Duties Arise

/ By / Trademark

[This post is authored by Md. Sabeeh Ahmad. Sabeeh is a recent law graduate from AMU, Aligarh. His previous posts can be accessed here.] The Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks (CGPDTM) seems to have embroiled itself into a fresh set of controversy, highlighting a major problem with the functioning of the Trademark Registry. This latest issue could mean that the last 2 years of trademark application examinations need to be reviewed, because they were assigned to third parties

Close to 2 years of Trademark Registry Orders Under Scrutiny After Questions of Illegal Delegation of Examiner Duties Arise Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 5-August 11)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summary of the posts on Lupin’s colour trademark registrations, revisions to Covaxin’s patent application, DHC’s order against a plaintiff who submitted false evidence in a trademark suit, and BHC’s decision restraining AI platforms from using Arijit Singh’s likeness. This and much more in this SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know.  Highlights of the Week What’s in a Colour?

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 5-August 11) Read More »

Scroll to Top