Intellectual Property | Intellepedia

Court Clarifies Rules on Confidentiality Clubs and Comparable Licenses in SEP Patent Disputes: Nokia v. Asustek & Ors (2025)

Cartoon banner showing a blond boy holding a finger to his lips in a “shhh” gesture, beside a speech bubble that reads “Shhhhhh..!! It’s Confidential…” on a purple-to-yellow gradient background.

Delhi Hight Court clarifies SEP rules on Confidentiality Clubs and license redactions in Nokia v. Asustek, allowing in-house access without restrictions.

Copyright Ownership in Insolvency: How IP Rights Acquired Through Compromise Prevail Over Legal Heirs

Film studio setup with professional lighting and camera equipment and text stating, 'Copyright ownership in insolvency : unveiling IP rights in dispute'

The Madras High Court confirmed that copyright ownership in insolvency acquired through a court approved compromise takes precedence over claims by legal heirs. The plaintiff was granted a permanent injunction, accounting of profits, and costs, while compensatory damages were denied due to insufficient evidence

Court Allows EMD Millipore’s IR Spectroscopy Patent, Clarifies Scope of Sections 3(i) and 59

Blue DNA banner for article on EMD Millipore v. Controller of Patents interpreting Section 3(i) of the Patents Act.

Delhi HC green-lights EMD Millipore’s IR spectroscopy patent and narrows the sweep of Section 3(i), while affirming compliant claim amendments under Section 59.

Intra-Court Appeals Not Maintainable in Trademark Appeals: Calcutta High Court Interprets Section 100A CPC

In the case of Glorious Investment Limited vs Dunlop International Limited & Anr., the Calcutta High Court ruled that no intra-court appeal lies against an order of a Single Judge made under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act. The court held that once a Single Judge exercises appellate jurisdiction under the Act, a further appeal is barred by Section 100A of the Civil Procedure Code.

Promodome Trademark Dispute: Ex-Parte Injunction Granted

Colourful collage of words and the text 'Promodome Communication Secures Ex-Parte Injunction Against Promodome Digital' in white towards the right

The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte injunction in favour of Promodome Communication Private Limited, restraining the defendant from using identical marks and domain names. The decision highlights the Court’s handling of clear-cut trademark infringement and passing off matters.

Patent Refusal Cannot Be a Single Line: Calcutta High Court Calls for Reasoned Orders

Yellow road marking with bold black text reading “SINGLE LINE. DO NOT CROSS,” symbolizing the lack of reasoning in the Stromag GmbH patent refusal—a single-line decision that violated principles of natural justice.

In the case of Stromag GmbH vs. Controller General of Patents, the Calcutta High Court ruled that patent refusal orders must contain detailed reasoning. A single-line dismissal, the court said, does not meet the legal standards of a quasi-judicial function and is unsustainable.

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.

Justice Pratibha M. Singh of Delhi High Court to Chair WIPO’s Advisory Board of Judges

Justice Pratibha M. Singh will head WIPO’s Advisory Board of Judges (2025–2027), reflecting India’s assured stride in global IP jurisprudence.

Infrared-Based Biomolecule Detection is Not excluded under Section 3(i) of the Patents Act: Delhi HC

Close-up of a metallic microscope lens projecting an infrared beam onto stylized chemical structures, with DNA-like strands and an “IR” graph on a dark background.

In the case of EMD Millipore Corporation vs Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs, the Delhi High Court held that a non-invasive method for analysing biomolecules is not excluded from patentability under Section 3(i). The Court allowed the applicant to revert to earlier claims and upheld the right to amend claims in appeal.

Creating Similar Voices with AI Infringes Celebrity Rights, Kumar Sanu Case Confirms

In the case of Kumar Sanu Bhattacharjee vs Jammable Limited & Ors, the Delhi High Court restrained multiple AI platforms and online intermediaries from creating or circulating synthetic audio mimicking Kumar Sanu’s voice as well as other aspects of his persona. The court found that voice forms part of a celebrity’s personality along with other characteristics, and cannot be used without authorisation.