[Sponsored] Admissions Open: WIPO-NLUD-IPO Joint Masters/LL.M. at National Law University Delhi (Apply by June 3, 2024)

/ By / Opportunities, Sponsored

We are pleased to inform you that admissions are now open for the WIPO-NLUD-IPO joint Masters/ LL.M. programme. The last date to apply is June 3, 2024. For more detail please read the announcement below: Admissions Open: WIPO-NLUD-IPO Joint Masters/LL.M. at National Law University Delhi The National Law University Delhi invites online applications for admission to the Masters of Arts in Intellectual Property Law and Management (M.A. Degree Programme)/ Master of Law in Intellectual Property Law and Management (LL.M. Degree […]

[Sponsored] Admissions Open: WIPO-NLUD-IPO Joint Masters/LL.M. at National Law University Delhi (Apply by June 3, 2024) Read More »

Some Thoughts on the “Fairness” of the Delhi High Court’s Ericsson-Lava FRAND Determination- Part II

/ By / Patent

[This post is co-authored with Swaraj Paul Barooah.] This is Part II of the two part post on the recent Delhi High Court decision on the Ericsson-Lava SEP dispute. In Part I of the post we focussed on locating reasons for the FRAND determination by the Court. This part focuses on the Court’s findings on and calculation of damages payable to Ericsson, while critiquing the reasons (and the lack thereof) in the judgment. We shall also highlight the issues in

Some Thoughts on the “Fairness” of the Delhi High Court’s Ericsson-Lava FRAND Determination- Part II Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (April 15- April 21)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summaries of posts on the Ericsson- Lava SEP dispute, unauthorized use of protected material to train Gen AI, and CGPDTM’s call for feedback on IP administration in India. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know. Highlights of the Week Looking for the Reasons in the Delhi High Court’s FRAND Determination in the Ericsson- Lava SEP Case- Part I The Ericsson-Lava SEP decision

SpicyIP Weekly Review (April 15- April 21) Read More »

CGPDTM Invites Feedback on IP Administration in the Country

/ By / Copyright, Design, Geographical Indication, Patent, Trademark

In a welcome move, the office of Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks (CGPDTM) has invited feedback on IP administration in the country by CGPDTM, and the Copyright and GI Registries. For this, the Office has released a 6 page questionnaire on April 15 and has kept April 22 11:59 PM as the deadline to share the responses to this questionnaire. The questionnaire specifies that the feedback will be kept confidential and only the aggregate data from the survey

CGPDTM Invites Feedback on IP Administration in the Country Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (8 April- 14 April)

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Plant Variety Protection, Trademark

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summaries of posts on the India- EFTA TEPA, AP High Court’s curious findings on fair use, and Delhi High Court’s order imposing INR 1 lakh as damages on Google for failing to disclose information about their corresponding foreign applications. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know. Highlights of the Week EFTA-India Free Trade Agreement and Patents Rules Amendment: Compromising Public Accountability and

SpicyIP Weekly Review (8 April- 14 April) Read More »

Training GenAI: Infringement or Fair Use?

/ By / Copyright

Discussing the implications of unauthorized use of materials for training Generative AI models, we are pleased to bring to you this guest post by Goutham Rajeev and Vedant Bharadwaj Singh. The authors are third year students at the Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur. Training GenAI: Infringement or Fair Use? By Goutham Rajeev and Vedant Bharadwaj Singh A recent public response by OpenAI’s CTO (Chief Technical Officer) on the data sources used by them to train their new text-to-video AI engine

Training GenAI: Infringement or Fair Use? Read More »

Looking for the Reasons in the Delhi High Court’s FRAND Determination in the Ericsson- Lava SEP Case- Part I

/ By / Patent

This post is co-authored with Swaraj Paul Barooah. After the Delhi High Court dictated its decision in the long standing SEP dispute between Ericsson and Lava on March 28, 2024, the Court finally published the judgement on April 3, 2024. Penned by Justice Amit Bansal, this mammoth judgement runs for 476 pages (!) and deals with numerous issues like determining validity of the eight suit patents (revoking one), and infringement analysis in SEP cases. Unfortunately, despite the numerous pages, it

Looking for the Reasons in the Delhi High Court’s FRAND Determination in the Ericsson- Lava SEP Case- Part I Read More »

A meme with a picture of Robert Downey Junior depicted as patent office asking '"How was I supposed to know"

Google LLC v. Controller of Patents: Foreign Disclosure requirement and Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2024 

/ By / Patent

In Google LLC v. Controller of Patents, the court was hearing an appeal against the refusal to grant a patent on grounds of ‘lack of inventive step’, ‘lack of novelty’ and lack of ‘technical effect’ u/s. 3(k). In this post, I will not focus on the merits of the case. Rather, I will focus on the part relating to foreign application disclosure, discussed in Para 53-55. The court imposed a fine of Rs. 1 Lakh upon the Appellant for failing to

Google LLC v. Controller of Patents: Foreign Disclosure requirement and Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2024  Read More »

SpicyIP Tidbits – Natco’s Request to Vacate Ceritinib Interim Injunction Rejected, Madras High Court Revokes Omega Ecotech’s Patent, and Delhi High Court Upholds IPO’s Patent Rejection

/ By / Patent

Refuse: (1) to vacate an interim injunction, (2) to remand back to the patent office, and (3) to continue allowance of a patent grant! In the last few days, the Madras and Delhi High Courts have passed a few significant orders on these topics. Let’s take a look at these three orders in this quick tidbit. DHC Rejects Natco’s Request to Vacate Ceritinib Interim Injunction  In a detailed order passed on January 9, 2023, the Delhi High Court had granted

SpicyIP Tidbits – Natco’s Request to Vacate Ceritinib Interim Injunction Rejected, Madras High Court Revokes Omega Ecotech’s Patent, and Delhi High Court Upholds IPO’s Patent Rejection Read More »

Section 24(5) of the Plant Varieties Act Revived?

/ By / Plant Variety Protection

[This post is authored by SpicyIP Intern Vishno Sudheendra. Vishno is a second year law student at the NLSIU, Bangalore. His previous post can be accessed here.] On 22nd February 2024, the Delhi High Court, in UPL Limited v. Registrar & Anr. (“UPL judgment”), made observations that prima facie revived Section 24(5) of the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Rights Act, 2001 (“PV Act”). Some readers may know this section has had a recently troubled past. In 2016, a Division

Section 24(5) of the Plant Varieties Act Revived? Read More »

Scroll to Top