During the last PWS session, Manish Kumar, Associate, hosted a discussion on “Should India introduce a mandatory ‘One Nation, One Licence, One Payment (ONOL–OP)’ regime for use of copyrighted works in AI training?” The session examined whether mandatory blanket licensing can strike the right balance between safeguarding copyright holders’ exclusive rights and preserving the freedom necessary for AI development. Participants also discussed whether the ONOL–OP framework meaningfully resolves existing legal ambiguities or risks introducing excessive state control through centralised regulation. The session further assessed whether the proposed regime would strengthen India’s creative economy by ensuring sustainable compensation for creators, or whether it could undermine India’s competitiveness in the global AI race. The session concluded with a consensus that the move might be too soon, given the core issue is yet to be decided by the Courts in India and advocated adopting alternative approaches already in place in some jurisdictions. 

A Legal Issues Seminar was conducted by Meghana Killampalli, Associate, on the topic “Whether A Second Appeal Is Maintainable Against Orders Of The Trade Marks Registry?”

The session examined the appellate framework under Section 91 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, in conjunction with Sections 100 and 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to determine whether a Letters Patent Appeal or second appeal lies against orders passed by a Single Judge of the High Court in appeals from the Trade Marks Registry. Through an analysis of legislative history and judicial precedents, the discussion highlighted the conflicting judicial views on the issue. The seminar explored questions of legislative intent, the effect of the omission of a second appellate provision in the 1999 Act, and the relevance of the “trappings of a court” test in applying the bar under Section 100A CPC. The session concluded that the maintainability of a second appeal against Trade Marks Registry orders continues to be a contested and evolving area of trademark procedural law.

The Presentation can be accessed here.

During the last PWS session, Vanshika Gupta, Associate, hosted a discussion on “Whether film bodies can consolidate control over theatrical markets and industry economics?”. The session examined the recent industry-wide shifts towards standardised revenue-sharing models, mandated theatrical release windows, coordinated screen-allocation practices, and collective approaches to IP enforcement. The Attorneys deliberated on whether such coordinated economic frameworks can legitimately operate as industry self-regulation, or whether they risk concentrating market power and limiting exhibitor autonomy, producer flexibility, and consumer choice. The session concluded with a discussion on the need to balance industry stability with competitive neutrality.

Our administrators came together for a joyful and memorable Annual Lunch, filled with laughter, games, and a wonderful sense of togetherness beyond the everyday work routine.

At ALG, our administrators and paralegals form the backbone of our operations, the silent performers who ensure every process runs seamlessly behind the scenes and keeps ALG moving forward.

This year’s event celebrated team members’ achievements with various awards for their dedication and contribution to the firm.

During the last PWS session, Alolika Chakraborty, Trainee Associate, led a discussion on “Whether regulatory intervention is essential to address structural imbalances in India’s film industry?”. The session delved to discuss the reliability of existing online verification mechanisms on user-rating platforms, the effectiveness of gag orders & blanket injunctions in curbing paid reviews, and the need for a separate regulatory body to monitor manipulated online reviews. The Attorneys further discussed that how the paid reviews, covert influencer promotions, and review bombing have created a parallel economy of unregulated persuasion that distorts consumer perception and impacts production decisions, marketing budgets, release strategies, and post-release revenue cycles. The session concluded that while transaction-based verification appears to be the most effective way forward and organic user-rating ecosystems should not be regulated, regulatory efforts must focus on paid and AI-driven or bot-generated reviews.