When the Wall Speaks No More Moral Rights, the Whale Mural and the Amar Nath Sehgal Judgement
In the spring of 2026, workers engaged by the local organizing committee of the FIFA World Cup arrived at a building in downtown Dallas, Texas, armed with industrial paint rollers and a commercial directive: cover the whale. The mural they proceeded to obliterate, a 17,000-square-foot testament to ocean life titled Whaling Wall 82, hand-painted by celebrated marine artist Wyland over two painstaking weeks in 1999, had graced the building for nearly three decades. It was a beloved fixture of Dallas’s cultural fabric. Within days, it was gone, replaced by promotional artwork for the upcoming football tournament.
Can a Search Engine Sell Your Trademark? Delhi HC Rules on Keyword Advertising and Platform Liability
The intersection of trademark law and digital advertising has long been a contested frontier. One of its most persistent flashpoints concerns the practice of keyword advertising, where a business pays a search engine to display its advertisement when a user searches for a competitor’s brand name. In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, in Hindware Ltd. v. Grohe India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., has provided what is, to date, India’s most definitive judicial answer to the question: does selling a registered trademark as a search keyword amount to trademark infringement, and can the search engine itself be held liable?
FIFA World Cup 2026 Priacy Crackdown: Delhi Hc Grants Dynamic Injunction to Zee
The 2026 FIFA World Cup, co-hosted by the United States, Canada, and Mexico, is scheduled to be held from June 11 to July 19, 2026, and with the advent of any major sporting event, the online piracy sites also mushroom around the same time.
In India, Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited (“Zee”) secured exclusive media rights to broadcast and stream the 2026 FIFA World Cup, through a rights confirmation agreement entered into on June 1, 2026. Within days of this acquisition, rogue websites had already begun advertising unauthorized live streams of the tournament, a brazen, pre-emptive strike at Zee’s intellectual property even before the first whistle was blown.
Two Gates, Eleven Grounds: The Strategic Geometry of Patent Oppositions in India
In patent law, time is not just a measure, it is a strategy. Every filing, disclosure, and procedural decision carries commercial consequences that often outweigh the invention itself. Among all mechanisms in the Indian patent system, opposition stands out as the point where law, timing, and competitive strategy intersect most sharply.
Unlike many jurisdictions where validity challenges are primarily court-driven, India provides a uniquely layered pre-litigation framework that enables third parties to intervene early, and meaningfully, in the life of a patent. These interventions are not merely defensive tools; they function as strategic instruments capable of influencing claim scope, delaying exclusivity, or strengthening patent portfolios.
Defensive Publication: The Patent You Choose Not to Take
In intellectual property strategy, the most consequential decisions are often not what a company chooses to patent, but what it deliberately chooses not to patent.
Modern innovation ecosystems generate far more technical output than any organisation can economically prosecute through the patent system. Engineering teams iterate continuously. Manufacturing operations accumulate incremental process improvements. Software systems evolve through constant optimisation. Taken individually, these developments may appear incremental; collectively, they often represent a material source of competitive advantage.
There Is No World Patent: Choosing Between the PCT and Convention Routes from India
One of the most common beliefs among founders and first-time inventors is that there is something called an “international patent,” a single filing that protects an invention across the world.
It sounds simple: file once, get global protection, and focus on building the business. But patent law does not work that way.
It is territorial by design. Rights do not travel across borders, and there is no world patent. Instead, every patent is granted country by country. What the international system offers is not a global right, but two routes that help you reach multiple national patents: the Paris Convention route and the PCT route.
Bangladesh Trademarks: The Opportunity Hidden in the Numbers
Bangladesh has emerged as a compelling trademark jurisdiction for both domestic entrepreneurs and multinational corporations. With over 170 million consumers, a booming garment and manufacturing sector, and a rapidly digitising economy, the country’s intellectual property landscape is at a pivotal moment and the 2024 WIPO data tells a story that every business owner and legal counsel should read carefully.
The Bangladesh IP Office recorded 12,010 total filings in the reporting period placing it 72nd globally while resident filings stood at 7,966. A dip of 7.2% in overall filings might, at first glance, appear discouraging. In reality, it signals something else entirely: a window of competitive advantage for brands that act now, before the market corrects upward.
UKIPO 2026: Higher Fees, Stricter Rules, and a Hard Dealine for EU Trade Mark Holders
The UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) has announced a series of significant changes that will reshape trade mark protection in the United Kingdom. These updates — spanning fee increases, procedural reforms, and policy clarifications — will directly affect how trade marks are filed, managed, and enforced. Some measures are already in effect; others will be phased in over the coming months.
IBC Is Not an IP Court: Supreme Court Restricts NCLT from Deciding Trademark Title
The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gloster Limited v. Gloster Cables Limited[1], is a significant exposition on the limits of the adjudicatory powers of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Although the immediate controversy concerned proprietary rights over the trademark “GLOSTER”, the real issue before the Court was far more fundamental: whether insolvency forums can assume jurisdiction to determine complex questions of title to intellectual property merely because one of the parties is undergoing corporate insolvency resolution.
Cool Heads, Hot Dispute: Delhi HC Weighs Trade Dress and House Mark Defence in Dabur Emami Vs Navratna Oil
A decision of a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Dabur India Limited v. Emami Limited[1], pronounced on May 22, 2026, is a significant addition to Indian passing off jurisprudence concerning trade dress protection. The dispute arose from Dabur’s launch of Cool King Thanda Tael and Emami’s allegation that the packaging and overall get-up of Dabur’s product is deceptively similar to the long-established trade dress of Navratna Ayurvedic Oil that is sold by Emami.
Free Absolute Prohibition to Conditional Innovation- Section 4 of the Indian Patent Act and the Transformative Impact of the Shanti Act 2025
National security has been a cornerstone of India’s patent legislation since its inception. Section 4 of the Indian Patents Act, 1970, exemplifies this priority by imposing an absolute bar on patenting inventions related to atomic energy. This prohibition has historically reflected the government’s exclusive control over nuclear technology and the strategic sensitivity associated with atomic energy. However, India’s evolving clean-energy objectives are driving a significant policy transformation.
USPTO Streamlined Claim Set Pilot Programme: A Strategic Pathway to Accelerated Patent Examination
Patent pendency remains one of the most significant challenges in U.S. patent prosecution. Average first-action wait times range from approximately 20 to 29 months across Technology Centers, creating real costs for startups seeking investor credibility, life sciences companies racing toward product launches, and technology firms defending competitive market position.
In response, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) launched the Streamlined Claim Set Pilot Program on October 27, 2025. This time-limited initiative advances qualifying applications ahead of the standard examination queue for first Office action (OA) consideration. The program is the USPTO’s most cost-accessible acceleration mechanism to date, offered at a fraction of Track One’s cost, and simultaneously functions as a policy study to assess whether streamlined claim architectures reduce pendency and examination burden. This article explains the program’s eligibility requirements, claim set constraints, strategic trade-offs, and practical implications for patent practitioners and applicants.
ARIPO’s 2026 Banjul Protocol Amendments: A Practical Guide for Brand Owners Expanding to Africa
Africa is becoming an increasingly important market for global brands. With a combined GDP of more than USD 3 trillion, a fast-growing urban middle class, and stronger regional trade driven by the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), the continent offers significant opportunities for business expansion.
However, trademark protection has not always kept pace with this growth. Until recently, securing and managing trademark rights across Africa could be complex, creating challenges for businesses looking to protect their brands as they expand into new markets.