Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories of February 2026 on Intellectual Property Rights from all High Courts; covering key updates on Personality Rights, Trade mark and Copyright infringement.
“Defendants have copied the trade dresses of the plaintiff in entirety, in which plaintiff has a copyright and the intent behind copying is to trade over the goodwill and reputation of the plaintiff, which it has built over the years and to misrepresent to the public that their goods have some association with the plaintiff.”
“A comparison of the original artistic works of the plaintiff posted on Instagram with that of the infringing works of Defendants1 and 2 posted on Instagram clearly depicts, prima facie, infringement of the copyrights of the plaintiff.”
Delay in blocking access to rogue platforms would result in irreparable breach of JioStar India’s exclusive broadcast rights and revenue loss.
“The ad hoc arrangement was directed purely as an interim arrangement so that Defendant 1 can continue to use the sound recordings of the plaintiff’s repertoire and, at the same time, the plaintiff is protected by way of deposit of ad hoc license fees, out of which certain amount was permitted to be withdrawn by the plaintiff”
“The need for immediate relief is particularly pressing in this case as the infringing websites are making available the plaintiffs’ copyrighted works, which could lead to significant financial losses for the plaintiffs.”
“The franchise agreement prima facie indicated acceptance of ownership of the plaintiff in the registered trademarks and permitted use only during subsistence of the agreement.”
“Though the balance of convenience is not in favour of the plaintiff, if the movie is released, the plaintiff would be in a position to claim damages.”
“Ilaiyaraaj’s identity, name, image, and work are being exploited deliberately disregarding the celebrity’s personality rights, on digital platforms, to gain traction and generate revenue without authorisation.”
“Once copyright infringement is the core relief, incidental or ancillary reliefs, whether based on confidentiality, trade secrets, or passing off, do not affect maintainability of the suit as a whole.”
“Indian classical music rarely follows a system of written notation or publication. Since ancient time, the compositions of Indian music were taught orally in the gurushishya Parampara , where knowledge was passed down through oral learning, improvisation, and repeated performance, rather than formal documentation. Hence, after explicitly declaring that fixation is not required, using fixation and performance as the determinative is against the legislation’s aim and objective.”
“Given the wilful disregard for the undertaking by Defendant 1, blocking access to ‘Sci-Hub’ and ‘Sci-Net’ through internet service providers is a necessary and proportionate enforcement measure, failure of which may embolden further violations of the plaintiffs’ copyrights.”
“The applicant was seeking monopoly over matters in which ex-facie no copyright subsisted to begin with, like common themes, ideas, unoriginal/stocks/scenes-a-faire matters, and other aspects directly flowing from such elements.”
“The plaintiff’s registered trade mark and artistic work is infringed by the defendants, and it is likely to cause confusion in the minds of the public, thus, unless ad-interim reliefs are granted, the plaintiff will suffer irreparable loss, harm, and injury.”
Covering all the important intellectual property rights cases across various High Courts and the Supreme Court, this roundup provides a quick summary of cases, latest legal updates in intellectual property rights and links to other roundups.
“The combination of the two words “RAM” and “BANDHU” is a coined word and arbitrary adaption being totally unconnected with the goods marketed under the trade mark, gives rise to claim for exclusivity.”
“Since Defendant 2 has perpetual right to use music and songs; he also has perpetual right to grant licence to others in respect of the said music and songs.”
The case pertains to alleged exploitation of PPL’s sound recording in the bars and restaurants owned by Azure Hospitality without taking any license from PPL.
“Refusal to grant interim injunction at this stage would cause irreparable harm to Inox, as Cryogas—having no rights to the intellectual property—would be able to exploit Inox goodwill without any legal deterrent.”
“Substantial amount of money is spent by producers and those involved in such creative works, and staying the release of such films/web-series would cause immense loss to all those involved in it.”