Aishwarya Rai Personality Rights
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“When the identity of a famous personality is used without their consent or authorization, it may not only lead to commercial detriment to the concerned individual but also impact their right to live with dignity.”

NLIU IPR Law Journal
Call For PapersLaw School News

The Blog on Technology and Intellectual Property Law aims to serve as a forum for the expression of the authors’ views on various topics of IP law and technology.

Own Name Defence in Trade Marks
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The appellant, Vasundhra Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., incorporated in 1999, claims continuous use and registration of the mark VASUNDHRA for jewellery, while the respondent, Vasundhara Fashion Jewellery LLP, incorporated in 2016, traces its mark VASUNDHARA to its founder Vasundhara Mantri, who has used the name in business since 2001.

VI-John Dabur Meswak Trademark suit
Case BriefsHigh Courts

There is no absolute bar on the Trial Court to consider the subsequent developments and condone the delay if justifiable grounds are made out in the Application for condonation of delay.

Copyright infringement case against Dream Girl 2
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“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.”

Travel Blue-miniso design piracy case
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The early entry of the Travel Blue’s registered design in the market which is now sought to be diluted by the Miniso’s infringed product is prima facie likely to cause injury to the Travel Blue Products’ business, reputation and goodwill.

Kannappa
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The film Kannappa is based on religious folkfare about Lord Shiva and his devoted follower, capturing the journey of the follower and his transformation in exploring spirituality.

Reliance Industries Dynamic Injunction
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The defendants were found to be commercially manufacturing, marketing, and selling various FMCG products. These include Poha, Wheat Flour, Makhana, Pulses, Lentils, Salt, and similar goods. They did so using Reliance’s well-known and registered ‘RELIANCE’ and ‘JIO’ trademarks without authorization.

relief to Birkenstock
Case BriefsHigh Courts

In March 2025, Birkenstock discovered large-scale counterfeiting of its footwear originating from rural Agra, with products infiltrating Delhi markets like Karol Bagh and Tilak Nagar. Investigations confirmed defendants 2 to 4 were manufacturing and distributing counterfeit BIRKENSTOCK sandals.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“Mere reliance on sales figures, promotional expenditure, or broad assertions of popularity, without cogent documentary substantiation connecting such use exclusively to the mark “ONE FOR ALL”, is insufficient.”

Call for Book Chapters
Law School NewsOthers

DPIIT-IPR Chair & CIRF-in-IPHD at Chanakya National Law University- Patna announced Call for book chapters for an edited book titled Valuation of Intellectual Property Assets.

Calcutta High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The interaction of patent laws and ethics is an uncomfortable relationship and has always produced difficulties. In such circumstances, section 3(b) ought not to be interpreted to deal with all subjective concerns of morality, public order or health regardless of any scientific or technical evidence or any cogent reasoning.

Justice Pratibha M. Singh
New releasesNews

EBC in collaboration with The Law Forum hosted a discussion on ‘Commercial Disputes Resolution- Challenges and Strategies’ at the Delhi High Court on 22-05-2025.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The plaintiff stated that on 22-01-2025, the defendant announced on various social media platforms that the Assigned Film will be released on 27-03-2025. He stated that the theatrical release of the Assigned Film is proposed in the Southern States of India i.e., Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Pondicherry in original language – Tamil as well as overseas (except Nepal).

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The plaintiff uses the mark ‘JANGEER’, whereas the mark of the defendant includes an ‘I’ in place of ‘EE’ and ‘D’ in place of ‘R’ i.e., ‘JANGID’. Apart from the difference in the spellings of the marks of the plaintiff and the defendant, the manner and style of writing is also completely different. The added features in the defendant’s mark make it quite distinct from the plaintiff’s mark.

Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court held that Moonshine had demonstrated a prima facie case for a grant of injunction, the refusal of which would cause an irreparable loss to it.

High Court Weekly Roundup
High Court Round UpLegal RoundUp

A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.

High Court Weekly Roundup
High Court Round UpLegal RoundUp

A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.

High Court Weekly Roundup
High Court Round UpLegal RoundUp

A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.

High Court Weekly Roundup
High Court Round UpLegal RoundUp

A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.