Skip to content
Subscribe

Latest Analyses

Browse every analysis published on Its IP Time.

Browse

Latest Analyses

trademark

Delhi HC Denies Injunction: Why Descriptive Marks Face Hurdles

The Delhi High Court has clarified that descriptive trademarks lack the exclusivity required for injunctive relief in passing off actions unless secondary meaning is proven. Relying on the Wander v. Antox precedent, the court emphasized that appellate interference in discretionary orders is restricted, particularly when the appellant fails to disclose historical prosecution disclaimers. This ruling highlights the necessity of robust evidence for prior use and warns practitioners that subsequent trademark registrations cannot retroactively justify delays in filing appeals under the Limitation Act.

6 min read
trademark

Bisleri vs. Agrawal: Bombay HC Decrees Settlement on ‘BILSSERI’

The Bombay High Court has validated a consent decree that effectively resolves a trademark infringement and passing off dispute by imposing strict punitive consequences for future violations. By leveraging the Commercial Courts Act 2015, the parties achieved an enforceable resolution that includes the destruction of infringing goods, withdrawal of trademark applications, and a substantial financial penalty clause. This judgment underscores the efficacy of well-drafted consent terms in securing proprietary interests while bypassing the extended duration of trial proceedings in high-stakes intellectual property litigation.

6 min read
Copyright

Vishesh Pictures v. BSNL: Madras HC Extends Dynamic Blocking Net

The Madras High Court’s decision to grant a dynamic blocking order against internet service providers underscores the judiciary's proactive stance in protecting cinematographic intellectual property. By invoking Section 13(1)(b) and Section 51 of the Copyright Act 1957, the court recognized that the immediate restraint of rogue websites is essential to preventing irreparable harm. This case serves as a vital precedent for IP lawyers, highlighting that comprehensive evidentiary schedules and precise adherence to Order XXXIX of the Civil Procedure Code are critical to securing effective interim relief.

6 min read
Copyright

Aamir Khan Productions v. BSNL: Madras HC Grants Dynamic Injunction

The Madras High Court has issued a landmark dynamic injunction to combat film piracy, ordering multiple internet service providers to block access to both existing and future unauthorized mirror websites hosting copyrighted content. Grounded in Section 51 of the Copyright Act 1957, this ruling confirms that the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) certificate serves as prime facie evidence of ownership. Practitioners should utilize broad, future-facing prayer clauses to effectively neutralize digital piracy and prevent the persistent migration of infringing content to new domain names.

7 min read
trademark

Madras HC Orders Registry to Notify Parties in Trademark Rectification

The Madras High Court has established that a transfer of rectification proceedings from the Registrar of Trade Marks to the High Court under Section 125 of the Trade Marks Act 1999 mandates strict adherence to natural justice. An administrative oversight in serving notice to the petitioner constitutes a fatal procedural defect, warranting the restoration of the plea. Legal practitioners must independently verify case statuses via the High Court docket, as relying solely on the registry’s administrative machinery poses significant risks to client property rights and procedural standing.

8 min read
trademark

Dr. Reddy’s vs. Razenta: Delhi HC Cancels DAPLOGIN Trademark

The Delhi High Court has reinforced the sanctity of the Trade Marks Register by ordering the cancellation of a conflicting mark under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act 1999. In Dr. Reddy's v. Razenta, the Court prioritized the rights of a prior user, emphasizing that well-known marks require absolute protection, particularly in the healthcare sector where confusion could lead to medical errors. This judgment confirms that registration is not an absolute defense and that the Court will exercise its rectification powers to remove deceptive marks that undermine existing brand reputation.

5 min read
trademark

Noviets Pharma vs. Novartis: Delhi HC Upholds Injunction

The Delhi High Court has affirmed that using a mark as a business identifier does not exempt an entity from trademark infringement liability if the mark is phonetically similar to a well-known brand. In Noviets Pharma v. Novartis, the Court upheld an injunction, citing the triple identity test and the global reputation of the NOVARTIS mark. By prioritizing consumer protection and international recognition via WIPO and INDRP findings, the ruling serves as a stern warning against riding on the coattails of established corporate identities within the sensitive Indian pharmaceutical market.

5 min read
designs

Delhi HC: Patent and Design Suits Mandated for Commercial Division

The Delhi High Court has confirmed that all patent and design infringement suits must be adjudicated by the Commercial Division of the High Court to ensure specialized oversight. In Yes Bank v. Modi Rubber, the bench held that Section 104 of the Patents Act 1970 and the Designs Act 2000 are inextricably linked to the Commercial Courts Act 2015. This procedural mandate streamlines litigation, ensuring that complex technical disputes are handled by benches equipped for commercial matters, thereby reducing jurisdictional ambiguity and fostering consistent judicial administration for intellectual property rights nationwide.

5 min read
trademark

Jyothy Labs vs. Dabur India: Bombay HC Rules on Trade Dress

The Bombay High Court has clarified that trade dress protection extends beyond individual packaging elements to the overall visual impression created for the average consumer. In Jyothy Labs v. Dabur, the Court ruled that strategic emulation of a competitor's trade dress constitutes passing off, even if brand names differ. By applying the global test for similarity under the Trade Marks Act 1999, the judiciary protects established market goodwill against deceptive mimicry. This decision emphasizes that trade dress audits are essential for companies to avoid liability and maintain brand integrity in the competitive FMCG sector.

6 min read
trademark

Alder Biochem vs. Zydus: Delhi HC Cancels Deceptively Similar Mark

The Delhi High Court recently reaffirmed that adding a prefix to a registered trademark does not shield a defendant from infringement claims in the pharmaceutical sector. In Alder Biochem v. Zydus, the Court held that BIOCHEM is the essential identifier of the plaintiffs' mark, rendering ALDER BIOCHEM deceptively similar. This ruling underscores that under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act 1999, prior usage and phonetic similarity carry decisive weight. Courts will strictly protect established brands to prevent consumer confusion, regardless of third-party usage arguments, prioritizing public health and commercial goodwill.

5 min read
Copyright

Copyright Law in India: Section 13 Originality and Fair Dealing

Copyright law in India protects the expression of ideas rather than ideas themselves, requiring a modicum of creativity to meet the statutory threshold for originality under Section 13. As established by Supreme Court precedent, originality is determined by the author's skill and labour, distinct from the mere sweat of the brow. Fair dealing provisions under Section 52 provide necessary exceptions for research and academic use, provided they do not infringe upon the owner's commercial rights. Understanding these principles is essential for balancing creator incentives with public access in the digital landscape.

13 min read