Supreme Court of India | May 18, 2007 | Civil Appeal No. 2756 of 2007 B.P. Singh & Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ. Background The trademark “Glucon-D” was originally registered in India in 1975 in the name of Glaxo Laboratories (Class 30 under the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958), though Glaxo had been using the […]
Supreme Court of India | Civil Appeal No. 6718 of 2013 | Decided: 2 June 2014 Bench: Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar & Justice A.K. Patnaik Citation: AIR 2014 SC 2210 | (2014) 15 SCC 360 Background Dr. Aloys Wobben, a German scientist-engineer and one of the world’s largest manufacturers of wind turbines, held approximately 2,700
Dr. Aloys Wobben & Another v. Yogesh Mehra & Others Read More »
Kerala High Court | Sukumaran J. | 7 December 1987 AIR 1989 Kerala 49 | (1988) 1 Ker LT 433 Background V.T. Thomas – popularly known as “Toms” – is the celebrated cartoonist who created the beloved characters Boban and Molly, a cartoon series featuring a mischievous child duo along with their family, which was
V.T. Thomas & Ors. v. Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. Read More »
Bombay High Court | A.P. Shah & D.K. Deshmukh JJ. | 27 March 2003 2003(27)PTC457(Bom) Background Sundial Communications Pvt. Ltd. (Plaintiff No. 1)- a television production company, conceptualized a show titled Kanhaiyya (later renamed Krish Kanhaiyya) in early 2002. The concept centered on Bal Krishna appearing in child form in a dysfunctional rich family, helping
Zee Telefilms Ltd. & Film and Shot v. Sundial Communications Pvt. Ltd. Read More »
Every trademark right in India passes through a single institutional gateway: the Trade Marks Registry. It is the administrative body that receives applications, conducts examination, publishes marks for opposition, grants registration, maintains the official register, and adjudicates a wide range of inter partes proceedings. Without the Registry, the statutory scheme of trademark protection under the
The Role of the Trade Marks Registry – Structure, Functions and Jurisdiction Read More »
Copyright protection does not extend to every work that a person produces. It extends only to works that are original. This single requirement – originality – is the gateway through which all claims to copyright protection must pass. It is at once the most fundamental concept in copyright law and, in many ways, the most
Originality as the Foundation of Copyright Protection in India Read More »
Few questions in Indian trademark law arise more frequently, or are decided with greater consequence, than whether two competing marks are deceptively similar to each other. The resolution of this question governs whether a trademark application will be accepted or rejected by the Registrar, whether an opposition proceeding will succeed or fail, and whether an
Deceptive Similarity and the Consumer Confusion Test in Indian Trademark Law Read More »
Court: High Court of Delhi Decided on: 1 July 1996 Presiding Judge: Justice R.C. Lahoti Citation: 1996 (38) DRJ 81 Background The plaintiff, Rupendra Kashyap, proprietor of M/S Som Sudha Prakashan, was appointed exclusive licensee of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), defendant No. 3, by written agreement dated 2 July 1991. Under this
Rupendra Kashyap v. Jiwan Publishing House & Ors. Read More »
Artificial intelligence and software are transforming every sector of the economy – from drug discovery and autonomous vehicles to financial modeling and legal research. As these technologies generate increasingly sophisticated outputs, the question of whether they can be protected by patents has become one of the most contested and consequential debates in intellectual property law.
Patentability of AI and Software Inventions in India Read More »
Pre-grant and post-grant opposition proceedings under the Patents Act, 1970 constitute one of the most distinctive features of the Indian patent system. Unlike several jurisdictions that rely predominantly on post-grant administrative review or judicial revocation, India has preserved a dual opposition framework that enables scrutiny both before and after grant. This structure reflects a deliberate
