Announcing the book “Fractures in IP, Trade, and Health: Centering a Public Health Framework”

/ By / COVID-19, Overlaps in IP, Patent, Publication

After a few years (!) of discussing these developments bit by bit (across US-India timezones), and weaving together thoughts and issues that we’ve also separately been writing on over the last few years, I’m thrilled to say that Prof Srividhya Ragavan and I have just published our book titled “Fractures in IP, Trade, and Health: Centering a Public Health Framework” (OUP 2026). The book is available on Oxford Academic’s online platform here or for purchase here. An Indian edition is […]

Announcing the book “Fractures in IP, Trade, and Health: Centering a Public Health Framework” Read More »

Digital Archiving: The MVP!

/ By / Copyright

“Books are for use” may have been written with physical libraries in mind, but the principle is just as relevant in today’s digital age. With copyright amendments reportedly in the offing, Maneesha Gupta examines why India’s library and archival exceptions need updating to enable meaningful digital preservation and access to knowledge, particularly for students and researchers. Maneesha is a fifth-year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) student at NMIMS School of Law, Bengaluru, and a participant in the SpicyIP Summer School 2026. Digital Archiving:

Digital Archiving: The MVP! Read More »

ANI v. OpenAI: User Rights, Fair Dealing, and the Future of AI in Indian Copyright Law (Part II)

/ By / Copyright, Innovation

Part I examined the Court’s transformative approach to fair dealing, its recognition of Section 52 as embodying user rights, and its emphasis on public interest. Part II turns to the remaining issues: whether ChatGPT memorized or substantially reproduced ANI’s works, and whether the Delhi High Court rightly assumed territorial jurisdiction. No memorization, regurgitation or substantial reproduction – Issue II The Court split Issue II into two sub-issues [Para 75]:  The Court observed that ChatGPT could not have memorized (i.e., storage

ANI v. OpenAI: User Rights, Fair Dealing, and the Future of AI in Indian Copyright Law (Part II) Read More »

ANI v. OpenAI: User Rights, Fair Dealing, and the Future of AI in Indian Copyright Law (Part I)

/ By / Copyright, Innovation

The judgment in ANI v OpenAI has finally been pronounced! OpenAI’s use of ANI’s copyrighted works was held to be prima facie non-infringing. 24th July, 2026 would mark a monumental day in Indian IP history, not just because the DHC tackled a cutting-edge AI-copyright dispute while preventing copyright maximalism but also because of its emphasis on public interest and user rights embodied in the Copyright Act, 1957.  To be clear, this is only an interim order. Yet, anyone familiar with

ANI v. OpenAI: User Rights, Fair Dealing, and the Future of AI in Indian Copyright Law (Part I) Read More »

InterDigital v. Transsion: A ‘Comparatively’ Better Pro-Tem Order?

/ By / Patent

At 100 pages, the pro tem security deposit order issued by the Delhi High Court in favour of InterDigital is the longest of the court’s SEP ad-interim orders, and offers a lot to unpack. To its credit, the order presents an overall balanced opinion, a clarity in delineation of the ad-interim stage from a future interim injunction and a steady point of view on the persuasive value of foreign decisions. This case changes some big rules of the pro tem

InterDigital v. Transsion: A ‘Comparatively’ Better Pro-Tem Order? Read More »

Part II: To CL Or Not To CL: That Ought Not Be The Question

/ By / Drug Regulation, Patent

Continuing from Part I, Rishabh Upadhyay explains that making a patented medicine free on paper does not necessarily make it accessible in practice. Through Rajasthan’s procurement and distribution model for Ribociclib, he argues that India’s access-to-medicines challenge is ultimately an infrastructural one, not merely a patent-law problem. Rishabh is an LL.M. candidate at South Asian University, having completed his undergraduate legal studies at the Faculty of Law, Banaras Hindu University. His interest lies in intellectual property jurisprudence, with particular emphasis

Part II: To CL Or Not To CL: That Ought Not Be The Question Read More »

Part I: To CL Or Not To CL: That Ought Not Be The Question

/ By / Patent

For years, Section 92 and 100 levers have occupied a central place in discussions on improving access to patented medicines in India. Yet, despite repeated calls for their use, the mechanism has remained almost entirely dormant. This 2-part post by Rishabh Upadhyay explains that the ongoing Ribociclib litigation before the Kerala High Court offers an opportunity to ask whether inaction over Section 92 and 100 requests is a consequence of governmental reluctance, or whether it reveals a deeper structural reality.

Part I: To CL Or Not To CL: That Ought Not Be The Question Read More »

Who Owns the Tools of Expression? A Copyright Question Across Time

/ By / Copyright

What happens when someone claims ownership over an alphabet or an entirely new language? Revisiting a little-known 1958 government opinion, Anshika Tripathi examines the limits of copyright and asks whether the law can ever protect the building blocks of communication. Anshika is a recent B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) graduate from Government Law College, DAVV, Indore. Her interests lie in intellectual property, consumer protection, and the intersection of law and technology. She was also a participant at the SpicyIP Summer School 2026.

Who Owns the Tools of Expression? A Copyright Question Across Time Read More »

SpicyIP Bells & Whistles: IP Events and Opportunities (28.07.2026)

/ By / Courses & Workshops, Opportunities

Welcome back to another week of Bells & Whistles. As always, we’ve rounded up a mix of developments, opportunities, and thoughtful reads from across the IP world along with a Bell of the Week that’s well worth revisiting. Bell of the Week: The Nexavar Compulsory Licence Some bells remind us that intellectual property is not just about protecting innovation, it is also about ensuring that innovation reaches the people who need it most.  This week’s bell revisits the Nexavar compulsory licence,

SpicyIP Bells & Whistles: IP Events and Opportunities (28.07.2026) Read More »

When Patent Appeals Survive but Patents Don’t: Taking a Look at the DHC Sulzer Decision

/ By / Patent

Two appeals. Two defeats. Yet, as Maneesha Gupta explains, Sulzer Mixpac AG v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs may be remembered less for the patent that failed than for the appeal that survived, adding another chapter to the debate over intra-court patent appeals. Maneesha is a fifth-year B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) student at NMIMS School of Law, Bengaluru, and a participant in the SpicyIP Summer School 2026. When Patent Appeals Survive but Patents Don’t: Taking a Look at the DHC Sulzer

When Patent Appeals Survive but Patents Don’t: Taking a Look at the DHC Sulzer Decision Read More »

Scroll to Top