A ‘Legal Issues Seminar- General IP’ (LIS-GIP) was conducted by Sonal Kumari, Trainee Associate, on “What is the threshold of use of a trademark to claim Quia Timet Action?”. The seminar discussed relevant provisions under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to determine whether an anticipatory infringement claim is maintainable via Quia Timet Action. The session analysed various judgments where the courts tried to strike a balance between credible threats and mere apprehensions. The seminar concluded with the members exchanging their views on what constitutes as “Imminent Threat” to establish a claim of Quia Timet Action under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.    

The presentation can be accessed here.

During last week’s PWS Session, Vaidehi Gupta (Associate) led a discussion on the topic “Does Surrogate Intellectual Property undermine Fair Trade Practices by Allowing Institutions to Claim Public Knowledge?” The session commenced with an in-depth discussion on surrogate intellectual property, focusing on the growing practice of institutions asserting control over digitized public domain works. The discussion explored arguments in favour, highlighting that digitization requires significant investment and institutions should have some control to recover costs, while opposing views emphasized that restricting access to digitized public domain works undermines fair competition, limits innovation, and contradicts the principles of open access. The insights shared during the session underscored that while institutions may recoup costs through reasonable monetization models, they should not be allowed to impose restrictive intellectual property claims on public knowledge, as this would unfairly hinder accessibility and fair trade practices.

During the last PWS session, Vanshika Gupta, Associate, led a discussion on “Do memes constitute an inherent violation of intellectual property rights?” The session began addressing the ongoing tension between intellectual property frameworks and the digital culture of memes. The session examined the nature of memes, whether they are inherently original and if they can be deemed to rely significantly on pre-existing copyrighted content. A key debate emerged on whether memes should qualify as transformative works, and whether there should be a clearer threshold to assess the value addition to the original content. The session also explored whether meme culture could curtail commercial opportunity of the original content creators. The session concluded with a consensus that while existing IP laws provide a framework for addressing meme-related disputes, the evolving nature of digital content and transformative use may necessitate clearer legal thresholds to balance the rights of original creators with the cultural significance and widespread dissemination of memes.

A ‘Legal Issues Seminar- General IP’ (LIS-GIP) was conducted by Shivanshi Gupta, Associate, on “Whether the requirement of pre-litigation mediation is mandatory in cases seeking urgent interim relief?” The seminar explored the relevant provisions of the Commercial Court Act 2015, which discusses Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement. The seminar focused on decisions where courts observed the nature of Section 12A of the Act as to whether it was either mandatory or directory in nature. The session concluded with a discussion of the recent developments in the judicial outlook that the Commercial Court should not allow parties to circumvent the statutory requirement of pre-litigation mediation by requesting urgent interim relief.

The presentation can be accessed here.

Today, on International Women’s Day, we celebrate the incredible women of ALG —their talent, resilience, and impact. We also recognize the importance of allyship and are proud that the ALG men champion that spirit. It’s this unity and respect for one another that makes ALG.

ALG is proud to foster a workplace where everyone thrives together.

Here’s to everyone who makes ALG what it is! 💜