Latest court orders, judgments, and legal developments from Indian courts — AI-curated and summarized.
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the economic rights of authors over their works in a recent ruling, emphasizing the intent behind the copyright amendments of 2012.
The Delhi High Court addressed the complexities surrounding Section 3(k) of the Indian Patents Act in the case Blackberry v. Controller. Despite previous guidelines, the interpretation of patentability remains unclear.
The Calcutta High Court has reaffirmed the continuing rights of authors under the copyright amendments of 2012. The ruling clarifies the rights of authors in relation to sound recordings, reinforcing their economic entitlements.
Zee Entertainment has filed a lawsuit against Nykaa, seeking damages of INR 2 crores for the alleged unauthorized use of copyrighted songs in Instagram reels. This case highlights the ongoing struggles related to copyright enforcement in the digital marketing space.
The Delhi High Court, in Blackberry v. Controller, reiterated the ambiguous nature of Section 3(k) of the Indian Patents Act. The court emphasized the ongoing confusion surrounding the patentability of specific inventions under this provision despite the recent CRI Guidelines.
The Calcutta High Court has reinforced the rights of authors concerning sound recordings, emphasizing the necessity for economic benefits from copyright provisions for underlying works.
Recent developments involving the Serum Institute of India regarding a Nipah vaccine and the sidelining of an indigenous HPV vaccine highlight ongoing issues in India's vaccine policy. These cases underscore significant challenges related to transparency and access.
The Delhi High Court's recent pro-tem order in Malikie v. Xiaomi raises concerns for SEP jurisprudence in India. The order highlights confusion in essentiality assessment and rate calculation.
In Huntington Alloys v Union of India, the Bombay HC scrutinizes the lack of rationale in the IPO's refusal of an atomic energy patent, raising important issues on patent adjudication.
The Calcutta High Court has reaffirmed the authors’ rights concerning the economic exploitation of their works embedded in sound recordings, underlining the significance of authors' entitlements in the copyright regime.
The Delhi High Court's pro-tem order in Malikie v. Xiaomi raises concerns about jurisprudential clarity in Standard Essential Patent (SEP) cases, emphasizing essentiality assessment and rate calculation complexities.
The slow rise of Section 3(m) of the Patents Act in litigation raises questions about its interpretation vis-a-vis European patent law. Authors Swaraj Barooah and Maneesha Gupta argue that these two legal frameworks serve fundamentally different purposes and should not be conflated.