SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social)

We aim to foster a more transparent, collaborative and productive IP/innovation eco-system for India. Retweets are not endorsements.

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

As we step into the new year, we thank our readers for their continued support and wish everyone a very happy and healthy year ahead.(5/5)
https://t.co/3vaFGIoAdK

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

and intellectual property. As always, we’ve also curated a fresh list of webinars and other opportunities from across the IP ecosystem for the week ahead. Happy reading! (2/2)
https://t.co/jMKAWnjcXu

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

SpicyIP’s Bells & Whistles!

This week, we’re ringing the bell for B.K. Keayla, whose work brought much-needed attention to farmers’ rights, seed sovereignty, and the often-overlooked role of agricultural communities in conversations around innovation (1/2)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

...from “deception,” trade marks risk turning into semiotic monopolies over language itself. (2/2)
https://t.co/75hcsLRaO5

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

In the recent decision passed by the DHC in Hindware v. Grohe, the Court treats keyword advertising as infringement even without evidence of confusion, diverted sales, or deceptive ads. Discussing the decision, @PhilIPnPolicy argues that once “diversion” is detached(1/2)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

in Part II, he shows how translation became a flashpoint between British publishers seeking control over the Indian market and Indian publishers, educators, and nationalists using translation to circulate knowledge across linguistic publics.
https://t.co/Fa5ExPwTnp (2/2)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

Continuing the discussion on the 1901 Oxford letter responding to vernacular translations of British works in India. @lokeshvyas0025 digs into the deeper conflict beneath that letter. By revisiting 2 important copyright disputes and the wider world of colonial print culture,(1/2)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

Drawing on a fascinating 1901 communication from Oxford concerning vernacular translations, @lokeshvyas0025 excavates the legal, commercial, and imperial anxieties that shaped early Indian copyright law and the politics of translation at its heart. (2/2)
https://t.co/QMfaEqTZ83

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

What begins as a seemingly archival letter from 1901 soon opens onto a far larger story: the tangled, uneven, and deeply contested evolution of copyright in colonial India. (1/2)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

automated copyright strike systems as tools of market leverage against independent creators. Bindushree M writes on the development below. (3/3)
https://t.co/3vTAj4M5rB

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

What happens when copyright enforcement tools become instruments of commercial control rather than legal protection? In a significant ruling in Anamika Sood v. Google LLC & Saregama India Ltd., the Saket District Court declared independent artist Anamika Sood the rightful (1/3)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

owner of her song “Ferrareee”, rejecting Saregama’s infringement claims over an expired copyright. But while the judgment resolves the ownership dispute, it leaves unresolved a larger structural concern: the growing misuse of (2/2)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

Discussing these aspects in detail, Arul Murugan S writes on this development below. (2/3)
https://t.co/qUL3YXBVjD

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

In a significant ruling in Hindware v. Grohe, the DHC drew a distinction between the use of generic marks and coined, source-identifying marks like “Hindware” as keywords, while simultaneously narrowing the scope of intermediary safe harbour for platforms such as Google.(1/3)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

If followed in future cases, it could lead to greater scrutiny of search advertising practices and reshape the scope of intermediary protection in India’s digital trademark regime.(2/3)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

Tracing the debates at the 1948 Brussels Revision Conference, @lokeshvyas0025 explores how battles over French, English, and multilingualism shaped the interpretive architecture of international copyright law that still persists today.
https://t.co/zgPV4lS01A (2/2)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

Some archives do not merely preserve history; they govern how we read it. The story of the Berne Convention’s official language(s) is also a story about power, access, and who gets to speak authoritatively in international copyright law. (1/2)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

We’ve also put together a fresh line-up of webinars, events and opportunities from across the IP space for the week ahead. Do take a look! (2/2)
https://t.co/od2ceaqIax

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

The latest edition of our Bells & Whistles is out! This week, we’re ringing the bell for the Public Library of Science, an initiative that helped reshape conversations around scientific publishing, open access and who gets to meaningfully participate in knowledge systems. (1/2)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

https://t.co/HtBM4ejC9I

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

Entering the last week of May with a post tracing Indian copyright doctrine and what exactly does it protect. Post on the Delhi HC’s ruling in Bansal v. Philips, a consequential SEP/FRAND decision. And a post on the expanding and increasingly amorphous scope of .. (1/2)

[SpicyIP (spicyip.bsky.social) @SpicyIP]

personality rights in India, most recently in the case of Aniruddhacharya Ji Maharaj. Case summaries and IP developments from the country and the globe and much more in this week’s SpicyIP Weekly Review. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know. (2/2)