ALG’s cinephiles came together for the latest edition of the Movie Club to discuss Alex Garland’s thought-provoking science fiction thriller Ex Machina.

The members delved into the film’s exploration of consciousness, artificial intelligence, and what it truly means to be human. Discussions centered on whether Ava’s actions demonstrated genuine self-awareness or merely sophisticated programming, prompting deeper conversations about the nature of free will, identity, and sentience. Drawing from philosophical thought experiments such as Mary’s Room, the group examined the distinction between knowledge and experience, debating whether consciousness can be fully understood through information alone. The Turing Test also featured prominently in the discussion, with members reflecting on whether convincing human behavior is sufficient evidence of intelligence, or if consciousness requires something more. The conversation expanded to broader themes of perception, manipulation, ethics in technological advancement, and humanity’s tendency to anthropomorphise machines. Members also drew parallels with other works exploring similar questions, discussing how Ex Machina challenges conventional boundaries between creator and creation.

ALG’s Movie Club concluded the session with a deeper appreciation for the film’s layered storytelling and philosophical depth, recognizing its enduring relevance in an era increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence and emerging technologies.

A Special Legal Issues Seminar was conducted by Bhavya and Manish, Associates, on “Year In Review – Notable IP Division Judgments and Developments: Quarter 1 (January to March)”. The session discussed notable trademark and copyright judgements from the first quarter of 2026, highlighting key judicial findings and their implications for intellectual property practice.

The Presentation can be accessed here.

A Legal Issues Seminar – General IP (LIS-GIP) was conducted by Vanshika Gupta, Associate, on the issue: “Whether Procedural Lapses in Trademark Examination Constitute Independent Grounds for Rectification?” The seminar examined the procedural framework under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and Rule 33 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017 governing the issuance of Examination Report. The discussion explored whether lapses in the examination process, including failure to conduct proper searches, non-citation of prior conflicting marks, or defective examination reports, can independently justify rectification or cancellation of a registered trademark. While several judicial decisions have emphasized that compliance with examination requirements is mandatory and that procedural lapses may vitiate the registration process, other decisions have clarified that not every procedural irregularity warrants cancellation unless the registration itself is shown to be substantively invalid under the Act. The seminar further analysed the evolving judicial approach balancing procedural compliance with the protection of substantive trademark rights.

The Presentation can be accessed here.

A Legal Issues Seminar – General IP (LIS-GIP) was conducted by Meghana Killampalli, Associate, on the issue: “When do changes or impairment constitute ‘legitimate reasons’ to restrain further dealing of lawfully acquired trademark goods?”. The session examined the intersection between trademark exhaustion and the rights of proprietors under Sections 29, 30(3) and 30(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The discussion unpacked the evolving jurisprudence from Kapil Wadhwa to Seagate and the recent Geonix decisions, highlighting the judicial shift from a stricter approach toward material alterations to a more nuanced reliance on the “full disclosure” principle for the resale of refurbished goods. The session ultimately highlighted the current legal framework for dealing in “end-of-life” goods, provided through clear packaging disclosures regarding origin and warranty, suffices to overcome claims of impairment and protect the manufacturer’s goodwill.

The Presentation can be accessed here.

A Legal Issues Seminar – General IP (LIS-GIP) was conducted by Alolika Chakraborty, Associate, on the issue: “Whether a passing off action can lie on the basis of use of features registered as a design?” The seminar examined the intersection between design protection and trademark law, and unpacked the evolving jurisprudence from Mohan Lal to Carlsberg and the recent Crocs decisions, highlighting the judicial shift from permitting passing off based on “trademark use” of a design (subject to goodwill and misrepresentation) to drawing a more nuanced distinction between “mere trademark use” and use as part of a larger “trade dress”. The discussion further explored the interpretative tensions arising from the Carlsberg judgement, especially the phrase “not limited or restricted to trademark use alone”, which subsequently led to competing understandings of the threshold for sustaining a passing off action. The seminar ultimately highlighted the continuing uncertainty in the law, particularly in delineating when the use of design elements goes beyond mere trademark use and amounts to protectable trade dress capable of sustaining a passing off claim. 

The Presentation can be accessed here.