Intellectual Property | Intellepedia

Court Upholds Hi-Tech Arai’s Claim In HTA Trademark Dispute

Automotive factory with machinery and rubber oil seals in the foreground.

The Delhi High Court upheld Hi-Tech Arai’s claim in the HTA trademark dispute, granting an interim injunction against the defendants for dishonest adoption and use of fabricated evidence. The decision emphasises the significance of continuous and bona fide use in Indian trademark law.

Come On Barbie, Let Us Stop the Trademark Party

In the case of Mattel, Inc. vs. Padum Borah & Ors, the Delhi High Court barred the use of the word ‘BARBIE’ by a hospitality business, holding that the use of the iconic trademark for unrelated services was likely to cause confusion and dilute the brand. The Court observed that the Defendant’s use of identical marks with stylized pink logos constituted dishonest adoption and granted an injunction to protect the Plaintiff’s rights.

Section 3(i) and Diagnostic Patents: Court Upholds Refusal of Prenatal Testing Method

DNA gel bands with a magnifying glass highlighting DNA bases and the word “Disease

Delhi HC rules Sequenom’s NIPT methods are excluded as “diagnostic” under Section 3(i) and hit by 3(b) for sex selection concerns, while keeping the door open for tools and products.

What’s Not Confidential Can’t Be Protected: No Injunction for Disclosed Customer Data

In the case of Indrex Private Limited vs Suresh Balasubramanian, the Bombay High Court examined whether customer information held by a former employee remained confidential after termination of a cooperation agreement. The plaintiff sought an injunction to restrain use of such information, but the Court declined, finding that the cooperation terms required disclosure and permitted lawful use by the business partner’s successor.

Patent Associate Openings at BananaIP – Mechanical & Electronics

Patent Associate Job Openings at BananaIP

Openings for Patent Associates in Mechanical and Electronics at BananaIP, Bangalore—drafting, prosecution, and tech analysis for serious innovators. Apply via hr@bananaip.com.

Personality Rights Infringement via Deepfakes and Digital Misuse

Concept image showing legal balance scales and a gavel symbolizing justice, with a shadowed human figure in the background and a laptop displaying digital media icons and the text 'Safeguarding personality rights in the age of AI and deepfakes'.

The Bombay High Court’s decision in Suniel Shetty vs John Doe addresses personality rights infringement caused by deepfakes and digital misuse. The judgement clarifies the scope of legal remedies for celebrities and the obligations of online platforms under Indian law.

Roche’s Appeal Dismissed, Path Open for Affordable Risdiplam in India

Illustration of a medicine bottle labeled “Risdiplam” next to the word “unaffordable,” with a hand using scissors to cut off the “un” prefix, symbolizing making the drug affordable.

The Delhi High Court dismissed Roche’s appeal against Natco Pharma, finding the Risdiplam patent prima facie obvious due to its similarity with prior genus patents, paving the way for affordable generic SMA treatment in India.

Court Orders Destruction of Counterfeit Tommy Hilfiger Goods

Image of person inspecting watches in a market background, with the texts, 'Original or Fake?' in the left and 'Court Orders Destruction of Counterfeit Tommy Hilfiger Goods' in the right.

The Delhi court granted a permanent injunction against the sale of counterfeit Tommy Hilfiger goods, ordering destruction of seized products. The decision highlights the application of trademark law in protecting brand owners from infringement and counterfeit activities in India.

Delhi HC Orders Takedown of Fake Videos of Journalist Sudhir Chaudhary

Man wearing a white mask sitting at a desk in front of a computer

The Delhi High Court has ordered Meta, Google, and others to promptly remove AI-generated fake videos defaming journalist Sudhir Chaudhary. Recognising the urgent harm, the Court mandated swift takedown and preservation of critical data for investigation.

Calcutta High Court Clarifies Scope of Section 3(h) in Patent Law: Base SE v. Controller of Patents

Silhouette of a farmer spraying crops with pesticides on one side and a tractor on the other, with rows of crop plants in between, set against a green background.

In Base SE v. Deputy Controller of Patents, the Calcutta High Court ruled that scientific and technical inventions addressing agricultural problems are not excluded under Section 3(h). It also clarified that partial grant of patent claims is not permitted under Indian patent law.