Industrial Designs | Intellepedia

Intellepedia’s Top Industrial Design Articles of 2025: A Year in Review

Banner image reading “Intellepedia’s Top Design Articles of 2025: A Year in Review” alongside a creative workspace with fashion sketches, measuring tape, color swatches, coffee, plants, and a laptop, symbolising industrial design and creativity.

A curated overview of India’s most significant industrial design law cases of 2025, highlighting key rulings on novelty, infringement, and coexistence of IP rights.

Same MAXO, New Spy: When a Mosquito Repellent Became a Camera and Trade Mark Law Stepped In

In the case of Jyothy Labs Limited vs Gautam Kumar, the court examined whether embedding spy cameras inside MAXO mosquito repellent machines and selling them online could be justified as resale, or whether such conduct crossed into trade mark infringement, trade dress misuse, and passing off.

Can You Copyright a Product Photo When Design Is Registered? Madras HC Clarifies

A wooden desk with engineering blueprints and technical drawings spread out. Two printed photographs of a pump assembly lie on the blueprints.

The Madras High Court has clarified that a product photograph can be copyrighted even if the product’s design is registered. The Court held that Section 15(1) of the Copyright Act does not bar copyright in a photograph of a registered design, as the two are distinct forms of intellectual property.

Court Orders Transfer of Design Cancellation Petition from Controller’s Office

Madras High Court pulls a split dispute into one forum, ordering transfer of the design cancellation petition to be heard with the passing-off suit under its IPD.

Court Grants ex-parte Order in Favor of Designer Gaurav Gupta

Fashion design process illustration showing dress pattern sketches, a designer drawing a dress on paper with sewing tools, and outlines of accessories like bags, shoes, and hats.

The Delhi High Court granted a permanent injunction and damages to Gaurav Gupta after finding willful trademark, copyright, and design infringement by the defendant. The judgment reinforces the legal remedies available to fashion designers in India for protecting their intellectual property rights.

Atomberg fans or Luker fans, whose “fan” are you?

Two futuristic pedestal fans labeled "Atomberg" and "Luker" face each other in a dark, dramatic setting. The Atomberg fan glows with blue neon light, while the Luker fan glows red. Wind blasts collide in the center, scattering debris and creating visible sparks, symbolizing intense rivalry or conflict.

The Bombay High Court dismissed Atomberg’s appeal against the denial of an interim injunction in a design infringement case against Luker. The court ruled that Atomberg’s fan design lacked novelty due to prior publication and was merely a trade variant.

Delhi High Court Revives Crocs’ Passing Off Suits Against Bata, Liberty Over Shape Trademark

A lineup of various footwear styles including sneakers, loafers, and a distinctive green clog resembling a Crocs shoe with cartoonish crocodile teeth, symbolizing Crocs amid competitor brands.

Delhi HC revives Crocs’ passing off suits, affirming coexistence of design and common law rights. Bata, Liberty among accused in shape trademark dispute.

Business Potential of Industrial Design in India – An unexplored goldmine

Illustration featuring various product designs—a glass bottle, piggy bank with money, futuristic aircraft wing, and a smartwatch—centered around the phrase "Let's Design" on a blue background, symbolising innovation and industrial design.

Though often overlooked in India, industrial design offers powerful commercial advantages. This blog explores its role in product differentiation, IP protection, and global competitiveness. With increasing design filings and cost-effective registration, it’s time Indian businesses tapped into this underused IP tool.

Patent Upheld, Design Dismissed: Dura-Line vs. Jain Irrigation – Part 1: Infringement & Relief

Illustration showing two people in discussion on the left and a justice scale on the right, with the text in between: “Dura-Line to Jain Irrigation: We Patented It. You Replicated It.” on a light green background.

This post analyzes the Delhi High Court’s decision in Dura-Line vs. Jain Irrigation, where the Court found patent infringement but rejected the design infringement claim.

Design Piracy and Self-Inking Stamps: How the Informed Observer Test Saved Addprint

A visual comparison of two self-inking stamp designs—Addprint's and Trodat Flashy 6904—showcasing multiple differences. On the left, Addprint's design features include a smoky curved top cover, a dug-out shape on the bottom of the top cover, and two line grips connected with a dugged bottom line. On the right, Trodat's design includes a crystal clear top cover, a plain fluent back body face, a four-line grip, smooth bottom and top covers, a dugged bottom cover, an air ventilator, and a top cover with a hole. At the centre is a colourful graphic stating “SAME SAME But DIFFERENT” alongside stick figures holding mismatched puzzle pieces, symbolising design differences.

In a design piracy case involving self-inking stamps, the Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal filed by Trodat GmbH and its affiliate against an order that allowed Addprint India Enterprises to manufacture and market a redesigned stamp. The Court held that the proposed design did not amount to piracy under Section 22 of the Designs Act, 2000.