Intellectual Property | Intellepedia

Inventorship of AI Technologies (DABUS): Submissions of the Opponent

In Patent Application No. 202017019068, Stephen L. Thaler named DABUS, an artificial intelligence system, as the inventor of a food container invention. The Opponent challenges that position by arguing that Indian patent law recognises only human inventors, and that an AI system cannot furnish the inventorship, entitlement, or proof of right needed to sustain a patent application.

Voicemonk Patent Prevails Over Flipkart: Innovation vs Opposition

Voicemonk Patent prevails over Flipkart in a key patent dispute, clarifying novelty, inventive step, and Section 3(k) under Indian patent law

Inventive Step Misjudged? Delhi HC Revives Trident’s Patent Application

Composite image showing a close-up of breathable maroon fabric, a cartoon panel of judges giving thumbs up, and colorful yarn balls representing air-rich yarn innovation in a legal patent context

Delhi HC revives Trident’s patent application, citing flaws in the inventive step analysis of its air-rich yarn invention.

Unauthorized Commercial Use of Persona of Andhra Pradesh Deputy CM Pawan Kalyan: Delhi HC Intervenes

In the background of merchandise such as t-shirts, mugs, an overlay text stating 'Unauthorized Commercial Use of Persona of Andhra Pradesh Deputy CM Pawan Kalyan: Delhi HC Intervenes'

The Delhi High Court intervened to protect actor and Andhra Pradesh Deputy CM Pawan Kalyan’s personality and publicity rights from unauthorized commercial use, including AI-generated impersonations. The Court granted interim injunctions, emphasizing the enforceability of celebrity rights under Indian law.

Copied Tractor Parts, Not the Drawings? That’s Not Infringement

Can you infringe copyright without ever seeing the original work? In a case about tractor parts and engineering drawings, the Madras High Court answered no. It ruled that producing similar tractor components without accessing or copying the original technical drawings does not violate copyright—even if the final parts match in size or shape.

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.

Delhi HC Grants Injunction in Adidas Counterfeit Socks Case

Black and white socks in black background with the title 'Adidas Counterfeit Socks Case' written in bold white font.

The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte injunction to Adidas in a trademark infringement and passing-off case concerning counterfeit socks. The Court also appointed a Local Commissioner for seizure and inspection, reinforcing strong protection against IP violations.

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.

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.

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.