Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 10-June 16)

/ By / Copyright, Design, Patent, Trademark

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summary of the post on DHC’s decision in Forest Essentials v. Baby Forest. This and much more in last week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know. Highlights of the Week Initial Interest Confusion Clash: Forest Essentials Battles Baby Forest at the DHC Is it still trademark infringement if confusion regarding similar marks doesn’t carry on through to the […]

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 10-June 16) Read More »

Initial Interest Confusion Clash: Forest Essentials Battles Baby Forest at the DHC

/ By / Trademark

Regarding the varying interpretation and understanding of the initial interest confusion test by a single judge bench and a division bench of the DHC in the recent Forest Essential v. Baby Forest case, we are pleased to present this post by SpicyIP intern Aditya Bhargava, critiquing the single judge’s interpretation of the doctrine. Aditya is a second-year law student at NLSIU Bangalore. He is interested in intellectual property, AI regulation and tech law. His previous post can be accessed here.

Initial Interest Confusion Clash: Forest Essentials Battles Baby Forest at the DHC Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 3-June 9)

/ By / Copyright, Geographical Indication, Patent, Trademark, Traditional Knowledge

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summaries of posts on DHC’s decision in Seagate v. Daichi, Genus-Species patents, and GI inspection mechanism in India. This and much more in last week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know. Highlights of the Week Genus-Species Disputes: Where From Here? Taking a look at some of the important decisions in genus-species patent cases, Dr. Victor Vaibhav Tandon discusses

SpicyIP Weekly Review (June 3-June 9) Read More »

Seagate Technology LLC v. Daichi International: How to resell ‘refurbished’ goods under the Trademarks Act? (Part II)

/ By / Trademark

In the previous post, I discussed the various findings of the court in the present case regarding exhaustion, removal and replacement of the original mark and the requirement of ‘full disclosure’. In this post, I will answer as to why the court held that removal and replacement of the original mark was prohibited u/s. 30(3). Then, I will discuss Prof. Kur’s article wherein she discusses the distinction between ‘substantial’ and ‘simple’ repair of a good and the implications of that in the

Seagate Technology LLC v. Daichi International: How to resell ‘refurbished’ goods under the Trademarks Act? (Part II) Read More »

Seagate Technology LLC v. Daichi International: How to resell ‘refurbished’ goods under the Trademarks Act? (Part I)

/ By / Trademark

The judgment in Seagate Technology LLC v. Daichi International delivered on 21st May 2024 by the Delhi HC has the potential to change how the ‘refurbishment industry’ in India works. The industry for resale of used products has been a part of several trademark litigations in the past. (here) As I discuss in this post, the refurbishment industry has several stakeholders involved. However, constant litigations threaten the growth and expansion of the industry (here). The findings in this judgement, however, promise to turn around

Seagate Technology LLC v. Daichi International: How to resell ‘refurbished’ goods under the Trademarks Act? (Part I) Read More »

An Assessment of Inspection Mechanism in the Indian GI Regime

/ By / Geographical Indication

Analyzing the inspection mechanism of registered GIs under the Indian GI regime, and highlighting some practical loopholes within it, we are pleased to bring to you this guest post by Sakshee Sahay. Sakshee is currently pursuing a Masters of Law in IP from the Rajiv Gandhi School of Intellectual Property Law, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur. She is also a Trademark Attorney and a registered Advocate at the Bar Council of Delhi. An Assessment of Inspection Mechanism in the Indian

An Assessment of Inspection Mechanism in the Indian GI Regime Read More »

Genus-Species Disputes: Where From Here?

/ By / Patent

We are pleased to bring to our readers this guest post on genus-species patent disputes in India by Dr. Victor Vaibhav Tandon. In this post, Dr. Tandon discusses Delhi High Court’s position on genus-species patents over different cases and assesses what could be the future course for the patentees in disputes involving such cases. Dr. Tandon is an academician turned lawyer, with the law firm Saikrishna and Associates. He continues to teach patent law- rather sporadically- at ILI and ISIL.

Genus-Species Disputes: Where From Here? Read More »

WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge: Concerns of India and Developing Nations- Part II

/ By / Traditional Knowledge

After assessing the requirement to mandatorily disclose the source of genetic resource/ associated traditional knowledge under the recent WIPO treaty, in part II of his post, Dr. Anson CJ takes a look at the implication of this requirement on India. Dr. Anson is an Assistant Professor at the Inter University Centre for IPR Studies, Cochin University of Science and Technology, Kochi and has previously contributed to the blog here. Interested readers can also take a look at Part I here, and here and here

WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge: Concerns of India and Developing Nations- Part II Read More »

WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge: Concerns of India and Developing Nations- Part I

/ By / Traditional Knowledge

Reflecting on the recent WIPO treaty on genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge through the lens of existing literature on the requirement to disclose the source of the resource or the knowledge, we are pleased to bring to you part I of the two part post by Dr. Anson CJ on the WIPO treaty. Part II will discuss the implication of the treaty on India and other developing countries. Dr. Anson is an Assistant Professor at the Inter University Centre

WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge: Concerns of India and Developing Nations- Part I Read More »

Image with SpicyIP logo and the words "Weekly Review"

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 27-June 2)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summaries of posts by Lokesh on his ATRIP Winning Essay, the Delhi High Court’s decision in Vans v. FCB and the Delhi High Court’s decision awarding Rs. 200 crore damages in a patent infringement suit. This and much more in last week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know. Highlights of the Week ATRIP Winning Essay 2023: Whither Global

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 27-June 2) Read More »

Scroll to Top