Intellepedia | IP News Center

Sacred Cow, Groundless Threat: Delhi High Court on Copyrights and Amazon

In the case of Avaia Ventures Private Limited v. Wildship Enterprises Private Limited, a competitor filed successive copyright complaints on Amazon against a seller of silver plated Kamdhenu cow idols, armed with no copyright registration, no court proceedings, and a product page URL where the copyright number should have been. The Delhi High Court found that filing platform level takedown complaints without ever approaching a court of competent jurisdiction is a groundless threat within the meaning of Section 60 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The court also held, at a prima facie stage, that the Kamdhenu cow with calf is a sacred motif in the public domain and that mass commercial production of more than fifty units had, in any event, extinguished any copyright the complainant may have claimed.

Dhurandhar Song Rights: Oye Oye, Not So Easy

Promotional banner for “The Revenge: Dhurandhar” showing a lone man walking through a fiery, orange-lit urban setting, with bold metallic title text in the foreground and flames surrounding the scene.

In the case of Trimurti Films Private Limited v. B62 Studios Private Limited & Ors., the plaintiff claimed copyright ownership over Tirchi Topiwale from the film Tridev and objected to its use and remix in Dhurandhar: The Revenge. The defendants relied on a 1988 assignment agreement and earlier uses of songs from Tridev in other films. The court refused interim relief after considering the agreement, prior conduct, suppression allegations, and balance of convenience.

AI and the Future of In-House IP Counsel Jobs in India: Which Roles Will Survive?

In-house IP counsel in India facing a crossroads between AI-automated routine work and strategic business decision-making, illustrated as a professional at a fork in a corporate corridor.

As AI systems grow capable of handling the routine IP tasks that occupy most Indian in-house IP teams, companies will start asking whether large internal departments are still necessary. This piece examines which in-house IP counsel roles are most at risk, and what it will take to stay relevant in an AI-assisted IP landscape.

No Breeze For Atomberg’s Design Claim: Bombay High Court Says Pigeon Fan Looks Different

llustration of a pigeon beside vintage fans representing the Atomberg v Stove Kraft design infringement and passing off dispute.

In the case of Atomberg Technologies Private Limited v Stove Kraft Limited, the Bombay High Court dealt with a design infringement and passing off dispute relating to ceiling fans. Atomberg alleged that Stove Kraft’s Pigeon fan copied its registered fan design, but the Court refused interim relief after finding that the proper comparison had to be made with the registered design and not with later product models. The Court also found visible differences between the rival fans and held that Atomberg had not established goodwill in the particular get up of the suit fan for passing off.

Prescription Without Diagnosis: Court Remands Patent Refusal for Medical Research Engine

Patent refusal document stamped “Refused” with a magnifying glass on a wooden desk, representing legal review of a rejected patent application.

The Bombay High Court, in Navya Network Inc. v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, set aside a patent refusal for a “Medical Research Retrieval Engine,” ruling that the Patent Office failed to apply the five-step inventive step test and introduced new Section 3(k) grounds in the refusal order that were never put to the applicant at the hearing stage.

Delhi High Court Revisits the Scope of Section 3(d) in Agrochemical Patents

Banner reading “Section 3(d) and Agrochemicals: Beyond Therapeutic Efficacy,” with illustrated farmers spraying crops on both sides.

The Delhi High Court interprets Section 3(d) in the agrochemical context by extending efficacy beyond therapeutic effect to encompass stability, usability, and practical field performance.

Mold-Tek Wins Patent Infringement Injunction Against Former Distributor

Patent infringement interim injunction India : Delhi High Court upholds tamper-evident packaging patents in Mold-Tek Packaging Limited v. Pronton Plast Pack Pvt. Ltd., 2026

In Mold-Tek Packaging Limited v. Pronton Plast Pack Pvt. Ltd., the Delhi High Court found both tamper-evident packaging patents valid and prima facie infringed, granted an interim injunction, and rejected the Gillette Defence, in a patent infringement case where the rival’s CEO was once the plaintiff’s own authorised distributor.

Golden Stag Hunts Blue Mangoes: Copyright Claim Falls Short

Golden stag glowing in a dark forest, symbolizing the copyright infringement dispute over Golden Stag and The House of Blue Mangoes.

In the case of Mr. David Davidar vs Ms. Sivasundari Bose, two novels set in South India turned into a long dispute over copyright and reputation. Ms. Bose claimed that The House of Blue Mangoes drew from her manuscript Golden Stag, while Mr. Davidar denied access, denied copying, and challenged the allegations.

Senior Trademark Associate Opening for Professionals with 5+ Years of Trademark Experience

Senior Trademark Associate Opening for Professionals with 5 Plus Years of Trademark Experience

BananaIP is hiring a Senior Trademark Associate for its Bengaluru office. The position is intended for professionals with at least 5 years of direct trademark experience who can manage clients, guide teams, and handle a wide range of Indian and international trademark matters. The role also values comfort with technology and the responsible use of AI tools to support better quality and efficient delivery in trademark practice.

Delhi HC Orders Xiaomi to Pay ₹272 Crore in Standard Essential Patent (SEP) Dispute

Standard essential patent pro tem security order - Delhi High Court directs Xiaomi to deposit ₹272 crore in Malikie Innovations and BlackBerry cellular SEP dispute

The Delhi High Court has ordered Xiaomi to deposit ₹272 crore as pro tem security in a standard essential patent infringement suit filed by Malikie Innovations Ltd., which holds BlackBerry’s cellular SEP portfolio. Did Xiaomi’s own move in a Chinese court inadvertently seal the outcome?