Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summaries of posts on the Ericsson- Lava SEP dispute, unauthorized use of protected material to train Gen AI, and CGPDTM’s call for feedback on IP administration in India. Anything we are missing out on? Drop a comment below to let us know.
Highlights of the Week
.svg){kind=link}
The Ericsson-Lava SEP decision has been big news all around! Big on damages (244 crores!), big in length (476 pages!), but is it short on reasoning? Swaraj and Praharsh dive into this question in the first of their two part post on the Court’s FRAND findings.
Training GenAI: Infringement or Fair Use?
Would the unauthorized use of protected material for training GenAI amount to copyright infringement or fair use? In this guest post, Goutham Rajeev and Vedant Bhardwaj Singh explore this question and suggest possible solutions to strike a balance between the development of GenAI and protecting copyright interests.
Other Post
CGPDTM Invites Feedback on IP Administration in the Country
In a welcome move, CGPDTM has invited feedback on IP administration in the country by releasing a 6 page questionnaire online. The deadline to submit response to this questionnaire is April 22 11:59 PM. Read on below to know more!
Case Summaries
Rachna Sagar Pvt Ltd vs Sovereign Mercantile Pvt Ltd & Ors on 9 April, 2024 ( Delhi High Court )
The defendant sought to vacate an ex-parte interim injunction order restraining it from using its registered trademark “Rachna Sagar”. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant has fraudulently obtained the registration without exhibiting its use of the mark since 1995, whereas the defendant argued that the plaintiff cannot restrain it from using its registered mark. The Court considered the evidence submitted by the parties and held that the plaintiff was able to establish prior use since 1996, whereas the defendant failed in establishing that it has been using the impugned mark since 1995 and thus dismissed the application.
The High Court set aside the impugned order rejecting the application to grant an ad interim injunction and appoint a local commissioner in a design infringement case. The appellant stated that the commercial court had rejected it applications for not placing any evidence on record to establish that the defendant’s designs are not registered. The court agreed with the appellant’s assertion and remanded the matter back to the commercial court for fresh consideration.
The plaintiff sought to restrain the defendant from using the impugned tradermark “Tiger”. The Court held that the plaintiff has not challenged the validity of the defendant’s trademark registration and thus cannot claim injunction against a valid registered trademark, it can still get an interim injunction on passing off grounds. The Court held that the plaintiff was the prior user of the “Tiger” mark and granted an interim injunction in the favor of the plaintiff.
The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust India vs Www.Friendwithbooks.Co on 5 April, 2024 (Delhi High Court)
Can a sanyasi hold copyright ownership over a work? The Delhi High Court responded to this question in this decision. The dispute here pertained to the defendant’s use of Srila Prabhupada’s work. The Court clarified that the renunciation of the world will not have any impact like renunciation/ extinguishing of copyright by the renunciate and the rights can be relinquished only by process known to the law.