Intellectual Property Archives

No more ‘Social’izing for Social chai

The Delhi High Court has issued an ex-parte ad-interim injunction against a restaurant/café operating under the name of Social Chai. The Court held that the addition of the suffix “CHAI” to “SOCIAL” is insufficient to effectively differentiate the Defendant’s mark from that of the Plaintiff’s, especially due to the identical domain of restaurant services. Continue Reading No more ‘Social’izing for Social chai

April 26, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 458Views 1Like

ShareFacebook

Exacting Standards for Pharma Trademarks and their Dominant Parts

In this infringement and passing off case filed by Sun Pharma against Glenmark, the Court was asked to determine if the trademark “INDAMET” infringes upon the trademark “ISTAMET XR CP”. Sun Pharma’s “ISTAMET XR CP” was registered in 2014 by its predecessor in title, and Glenmark’s trademark, INDAMET, was registered in 2021. Continue Reading Exacting Standards for Pharma Trademarks and their Dominant Parts

April 25, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 635Views 1Like

ShareFacebook

Well-known mark not a pre-requisite for grant of relief against infringement

The dispute centers on the “PEBBLE” mark used by V Guard and Crompton. V Guard, adopting it in 2013 for electric water heaters, clashed with Crompton’s 2020 application for “CROMPTON PEBBLE” for electric irons. Delhi High Court’s injunction restrained Crompton from using “PEBBLE,” citing Trade Marks Act violations. The Court upheld V Guard’s reputation, dismissing Crompton’s appeal. Continue Reading Well-known mark not a pre-requisite for grant of relief against infringement

April 24, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 746Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

SEP, Infringment and principles relating to actual costs – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 5

In this case, the Court has crystallized and reiterated several patent principles relating to patentability under Section 3(k), novelty, inventive step, infringement of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs), Exhaustion, FRAND royalty determination, and so on. Along with other principles, the Court has also outlined the principles for grant of actual costs. Continue Reading SEP, Infringment and principles relating to actual costs – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 5

April 23, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 571Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Standard Essential Patents, Claim charts and Infringement – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 4

This post covers the aspects of infringement as discussed by the Delhi High Court in the Lava v. Ericsson case. The Court noted that the fulcrum of the dispute between the parties in this case was the issue of whether Lava was guilty of infringing Ericsson’s patents or not. Continue Reading Standard Essential Patents, Claim charts and Infringement – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 4

April 22, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 678Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Call for Feedback: CGPDTM Service Excellence Survey 2024

Participate in the CGPDTM Service Excellence Survey, 2024 to help shape the future of IP administration in our country. Share your feedback by April 22nd and contribute to the enhancement of intellectual property practices. Continue Reading Call for Feedback: CGPDTM Service Excellence Survey 2024

April 19, 2024 BananaIP Reporter General, Intellectual Property 0Comment 366Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Exploring Patent Hold Up, Royalty Stacking, and Hold Out. Ericsson v. Lava case. Part 3

Exploring Patent Hold Up, Royalty Stacking, and Hold Out – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 3

Several aspects of Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) Licensing were discussed in the Ericsson Vs. Lava Case, and in this post, we will discuss three of those: Royalty Stacking, Hold Up, and Hold Out. Continue Reading Exploring Patent Hold Up, Royalty Stacking, and Hold Out – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 3

April 19, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 698Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Are you playing it Safe? Court encourages settlement in a music licensing case.

Unlicensed music played at sporting events can lead to copyright infringement lawsuits. This blog post explores a case where the event organizer blamed sponsors for the music, highlighting the complexities of copyright compliance during large events. Continue Reading Are you playing it Safe? Court encourages settlement in a music licensing case.

April 18, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Copyrights, Intellectual Property 0Comment 410Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Google’s Patent appeal dismissed, fine of 1 Lakh imposed

Delhi High Court upholds decision against Google LLC in patent appeal, imposes Rs.1 lakh fine for misleading disclosure. Case delves into inventive step assessment, citing prior art and user preferences. Authored by Sowmya Murthy, Patents Team, BananaIP Counsels. Case Citation: Google LLC v. The Controller of Patents, C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 395/2022 Continue Reading Google’s Patent appeal dismissed, fine of 1 Lakh imposed

April 16, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 492Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court upheld the decision to refuse CEAT Limited’s trademark application for “FARMAX.” Citing significant delay and potential confusion with existing marks, the Court dismissed the appeal. The decision underscores the importance of timely action and highlights the necessity for distinctiveness in trademark applications. Learn more about the case: Ceat Limited vs The Registrar Of Trade Marks. Continue Reading Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

April 15, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 420Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Exacting Standards for Pharma Trademarks and their Dominant Parts

Well-known mark not a pre-requisite for grant of relief against infringement

SEP, Infringment and principles relating to actual costs – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 5

Standard Essential Patents, Claim charts and Infringement – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 4

Call for Feedback: CGPDTM Service Excellence Survey 2024

Exploring Patent Hold Up, Royalty Stacking, and Hold Out – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 3

Are you playing it Safe? Court encourages settlement in a music licensing case.

Google’s Patent appeal dismissed, fine of 1 Lakh imposed

Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

Connect with Us

BananaIP has been acknowledged as a women-owned enterprise, certified by WEConnect International.

Connect with us