An Advocate enrolled on the rolls of the Bar Council of the State of Andhra Pradesh. What started as curiosity about how the law protects ideas, brands, inventions, and creative works gradually developed into a genuine passion for studying and explaining IP law, inspiring me to pursue a Masters degree (LL.M.) in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR).
In Indian trademark law, class boundaries are often secondary to the actual commercial connection between products. The doctrine of allied and cognate goods allows brand owners to challenge infringements even when items fall into different Nice classes. From the landmark Corn Products case to the recent GODFATHER decision, courts focus on trade channels, consumer overlap, and product usage to determine risk. This article explores how courts apply the anti-dissection rule and multi-factor tests to protect brand equity, providing a roadmap for practitioners managing cross-class trademark conflicts.
Our latest IP law digest covers significant Indian and global developments. Highlights include the Delhi High Court's dynamic injunctions against rogue streaming websites and landmark rulings on SEP security deposits in the InterDigital v. Transsion litigation. We delve into personality rights regarding deepfakes, arbitration clauses in franchise agreements, and international disputes like the Nike-7-Eleven trademark clash. Additionally, learn about the Trademark Registry's upgraded search portal, new patent agent exam registration details, and Shopify’s trade secret settlement. Stay ahead with essential summaries of high-stakes litigation and administrative updates shaping the modern intellectual property landscape.
Navigating the Indian Patents Act, 1970, can be complex for startups and researchers. This comprehensive FAQ covers the essentials of patentability, the differences between provisional and complete specifications, and the filing process under the latest 2024 Amendment Rules. Learn about expedited examination, renewal fees, and how to protect your intellectual property effectively. We also clarify critical concepts like compulsory licensing, patent infringement remedies, and the Bolar exception. Whether you are an inventor or a business owner, this guide provides the clarity needed to secure and enforce your patent rights in India.
Renewing a trademark in India requires careful adherence to timelines to avoid costly penalties or permanent removal from the Register. Under Section 25 of the Trade Marks Act, registrations last ten years from the filing date, not the certificate date. While Form TM-R is the standard for renewal, registrants often stumble over grace periods and restoration processes. Courts have consistently ruled that the Registrar cannot remove a mark without first issuing a mandatory Form RG-3 notice. This guide details the step-by-step renewal process, the 2025 fee structure, and critical risk mitigation strategies.
Receiving an 'Objected' status for your trademark application can be daunting, but it is not a final refusal. This comprehensive guide details how to navigate the examination process under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Learn to distinguish between Section 9 absolute grounds and Section 11 relative grounds. Discover effective strategies for drafting evidence-backed replies, utilizing affidavits of use, and handling show-cause hearings. We provide a step-by-step framework to help applicants address examiner concerns, meet strict one-month deadlines, and successfully transition from an 'Objected' status to the advertisement stage of the registration process.
June 2026 was a landmark month for Indian Intellectual Property law, marked by significant rulings from the Delhi High Court and beyond. From expanded liability for advertising platforms in keyword bidding cases to the formal recognition of PPL India as a copyright society, the developments are far-reaching. We explore crucial updates in trademark, patent, copyright, and geographical indication laws. This digest breaks down essential case law, including landmark decisions on personality rights and AI, helping practitioners stay updated with the rapidly evolving Indian legal landscape across all key IP sectors.
The Delhi High Court recently issued a landmark ruling in P.C. Duraisamy v. Kewal Krishan Kumar, ordering the removal of the SHAKTI trademark from the Register. The case highlights the limitations of claiming rights over a standalone word based solely on its inclusion in a composite mark. Despite the respondent's clever legal arguments under Sections 17 and 55(2) of the Trade Marks Act, the Court demanded actual evidence of independent use. This decision serves as a vital reminder that paper registrations without genuine, verifiable commercial usage are highly vulnerable to cancellation.
Section 9 of the Trade Marks Act 1999 establishes the absolute grounds for refusing trademark registration in India. It targets marks that lack distinctiveness, consist of descriptive terms, or have become customary in trade. Understanding the nuances between Section 9(1)(a), (b), and (c) is essential for practitioners seeking to overcome examination objections. Furthermore, the proviso to Section 9(1) offers a crucial pathway for registration through acquired distinctiveness. This article details the evidentiary standards required to prove secondary meaning and successfully navigate the Registrar’s objections to descriptive or generic trademarks.
This week's IP digest covers crucial Indian judicial developments, including the Delhi High Court's ruling on the Godfather trademark case, confirming that registered marks remain enforceable despite non-use. We explore critical patent insights from Shaafi Naturcure, where post-filing evidence was rejected, and Fraunhofer’s failed biomass patent. The digest also reviews high-stakes copyright battles, trademark rectification petitions involving 'Shakti', and the prestigious induction of Justice Prathiba M. Singh into the International IP Hall of Fame. Additionally, we analyze global IP trends, including US pharmaceutical patent disputes and CJEU platform liability rulings concerning algorithmic content curation.
The Delhi High Court has clarified in Shaafi Naturcure LLP v. Assistant Controller of Patents that approval from the National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) does not guarantee patentability. The court dismissed the appeal, ruling that the Biological Diversity Act and the Patents Act serve distinct objectives. Additionally, the bench emphasized that post-filing evidence cannot compensate for deficiencies in the original specification. With internal contradictions regarding synergistic effects and a failure to overcome traditional knowledge exclusions under Section 3(p), this judgment provides a vital roadmap for practitioners handling biodiversity-based pharmaceutical inventions in India.
•14 min read
Free Email Newsletter
Stay Ahead in IP Law with Its IP Time
Receive concise weekly and monthly IP Law updates.
