Intellectual Property | Intellepedia

Coconut Oil Bottle Trade Dress Protection and Injunction Confirmed

In the case of Edible Products (India) Limited vs Shalimar Chemical Works Private Limited, the Calcutta High Court considered whether the trade dress of coconut oil bottles—including shape, colour scheme, and packaging—was being passed off by a rival trader. The court concluded that the plaintiff’s trade dress had acquired distinctiveness and was entitled to protection under the law of passing off.

Aceclofenac Marks and the Limits of Exclusivity: The ACECLO Dispute

In the case of ACECLO versus ACECLOHEAL, aceclofenac-derived branding ran into Section 13 and the publici juris problem. Registration didn’t rescue exclusivity, and the visual and market differences did the rest.

Birkin Bag’s Three-Dimensional Trade Dress Recognised as Well-Known by Delhi High Court

In the case of Hermes International & Anr vs Macky Lifestyle Private Limited & Anr, the Delhi High Court examined whether the shape and configuration of the Birkin bag—registered as a three-dimensional mark—met the requirements for being declared a well-known trademark. The court found that the trade dress had acquired widespread recognition in the luxury fashion market among the relevant public making it well known.

Dr Reddy’s Semaglutide Exports to Continue as Court Denies Interim Relief to Novo Nordisk

Semaglutide injection pen with syringe surrounded by weighing scale, tape measure, dumbbell and fast food, symbolising weight loss and diabetes treatment.

The Delhi High Court refused Novo Nordisk interim relief against Dr Reddy’s, finding that the Semaglutide species patent faces serious validity challenges in light of the earlier genus patent. The Court allowed Dr Reddy’s to continue manufacturing Semaglutide in India solely for export to non-patent jurisdictions, with no domestic sales.

Once the Hearing Is Fixed, the Door Closes on New Evidence in Patent Oppositions

In the case of M/s Hi Tech Chemicals Limited vs Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs & Anr., the Madras High Court examined whether documents labeled as additional evidence could be admitted after the hearing was fixed in a post-grant patent opposition. The Court looked at the patent rules, and held that private documents do not qualify as “publications” under Rule 62(4), and are therefore not admissible after the hearing date was fixed.

Notarized document from a foreign Country must be accepted, says Calcutta High Court in Trademark case

A person stands facing three doors labeled "Foreign Notary," "Notary" (center), and "Indian Notary," symbolizing the dilemma of choosing between different types of notarization for legal documents.

Calcutta HC rules notarized foreign documents valid without apostille in Marriott trademark opposition, reinforcing fair procedure and natural justice.

Descriptiveness and Registrability of Composite Marks in Cancellation Proceedings

Scattered jigsaw puzzles with few puzzles with the words 'STORE', 'MY' and 'GOODS' and the images of a red house.

This post analyses a Delhi High Court decision on the registrability of composite marks in trademark cancellation proceedings. It highlights the importance of assessing marks as a whole and the evidentiary role of continuous use in such disputes.

The Bounce Trademark Dispute: Generic Marks in Salon Services

Salon mirror reflection with hair styling tools and lights.

The Bounce trademark dispute highlights the complexities of enforcing rights over generic marks in the salon industry. The Madras High Court’s interim order underscores the importance of trial evidence in determining exclusivity and infringement in descriptive trademark cases.

Use of copyright works for AI in India: One Nation One License One Payment

The DPIIT consultation paper ‘One Nation One License One Payment’ proposes a hybrid blanket licence–royalty framework for AI training on copyrighted works in India. This post sets out the proposed mechanism, key stakeholder positions and the timeline for filing comments with DPIIT.

Madras HC Awards ₹20 Lakhs Compensation in Amma Memorial Digital Project Dispute

In the background a museum with lighting visuals the overlay text reads, 'Amma memorial digital project dispute: The Case of Praveen Raj Jayachandran v. Fusion VR'

The Madras High Court resolved the Amma Memorial Digital Project dispute by awarding reasonable compensation for partial software development and concept creation. The judgement clarified copyright ownership, absence of profit-sharing rights, and the basis for determining damages in software-related project collaborations.