Intellectual Property Law Newsletter | November 2025

Welcome to the latest edition! The global IP ecosystem is experiencing strong momentum with record-high filings, a surge of AI-driven innovation, and pivotal rulings reflecting both technological advancement and evolving regulatory priorities.

The Weird & Wonderful - Bizarre IP Cases

India Recognises Its First Smell Trademark: Rose Scent for Tyres

Sumitomo Rubber Industries' application to register a rose-like fragrance for tires (Class 12) has been approved by India's Trade Marks Registry, marking the first acceptance of an olfactory trademark for advertisement. The application was first challenged under Sections 9(1)(a) and 2(1) (zb) for lacking distinctiveness and graphical representation. However, with the help of amicus curiae Pravin Anand and the adoption of a seven-dimensional scent vector created by IIIT Allahabad, which met the statutory representation requirement, the application progressed. Sumitomo established that the fragrance, which has nothing to do with tires, is arbitrary, distinctive, and able to serve as a trade-origin indicator by relying on earlier UK recognition of the same scent mark. Under Section 20, the Controller General has ordered that the mark be promoted as an olfactory trademark.

[Source]

The Pokémon Company / Nintendo (collectively “Nintendo”) and PocketPair (makers of the 2024 smash hit video game Palworld).

The Director of USPTO has last week ordered the re-examination of a recently granted US patent in the name of Nintendo Co. Ltd and The Pokémon Company. This power has been exercised on the Director's own initiative. What makes it bizarre that this has been initiated without any apparent application by a third party.

[Source]

Getty Images v Stability AI

On November 4, 2025, the UK High Court finally delivered its much-watched decision in Getty Images vs. Stability AI, one of the highest profile clashes between a traditional image library and an AI image generator. Getty claimed that Stable Diffusion was trained on millions of its photographs scraped without consent and argued that importing the trained model into the UK amounted to secondary copyright infringement, and that the AI outputs carrying distorted Getty watermarks infringed its trademarks and constituted passing off. The Court held that the trained Stable Diffusion model does not store copies of Getty's images and therefore is not an “infringing copy” for secondary infringement, even though Getty's content was used during training. However, the Court did find limited trademark infringement for outputs bearing the Getty watermark, treating Stability AI itself as responsible for those infringing images rather than the end users.

[Source]

Chinese Court Found AI-Generated Pictures Not Copyrightable - Convergence with the U.S. Standard? - KWM - Seagull Song

A recent Chinese ruling has taken a strict view on authorship in AI generated images. In this case, the court held that Midjourney outputs were not eligible for copyright protection because the user provided only broad prompts and could not show any concrete creative control or reproducible input. The judge concluded that the images were primarily the product of the AI system rather than human creativity. The court also noted that prompts themselves are unprotectable ideas. This stands in sharp contrast to an earlier Beijing Internet Court decision that recognized AI assisted images as copyrightable when detailed human involvement was demonstrated.

[Source]

Legal & Regulatory Updates

India

Public Notice: IP India Blocks Trademark Attorney Codes for Misuse of Credentials

The Intellectual Property Office of India (IP India) issued a public notice announcing the blocking of attorney codes belonging to several firms, including H. R. Gupta & Co. and Reliable Trademark Consultant, after finding that the credentials used to obtain them were inaccurate or misleading. The suspended codes prevent these firms from handling trademark filings until the inquiry concludes. IP India clarified that only duly registered trademark agents or advocates are authorized to represent clients before the Trademark Registry. The move aims to reinforce transparency, accountability, and professional integrity within India's IP ecosystem. By acting against false credential use, IP India seeks to restore trust in its digital filing system and ensure that only qualified practitioners manage intellectual property matters.

[Source]

NCLAT: CCI Has No Jurisdiction Over Patented Drugs

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) ruled that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has no authority to investigate alleged anti-competitive practices involving patented pharmaceutical products, as such matters fall exclusively under the Patents Act, 1970. The case stemmed from a complaint by hospital CEO Swapan Dey against Swiss drugmaker Vifor International AG, accusing it of abusing dominance by restricting supply and overpricing its patented anemia drug Ferric Carboxymaltose (FCM). The CCI had dismissed the complaint in 2022, finding Vifor's licensing with Indian firms Emcure and Lupin to be fair. Upholding that view, the NCLAT clarified that disputes concerning patent use must be governed by patent law, not competition law. The Tribunal further noted that since Vifor's patent expired in October 2023, FCM is now in the public domain, eliminating any ongoing concern over anti-competitive conduct.

[Source]

India to gain from the US FDA's move to fast-track biosimilar approvals

The US FDA released draft guidance to simplify and accelerate biosimilar approvals by reducing the need for comparative human trials and focusing on analytical testing. The reform is expected to lower development costs, expand market access, and streamline interchangeability for biosimilars. For India, a key global hub for affordable biologics, this presents major export and collaboration opportunities as more biologic drugs lose exclusivity in the US. The move strengthens the US-India pharma partnership and supports global access to cost-effective biologic treatments.

[Source]

Global updates

USA - November 2025 Guidance on AI-Assisted Inventorship

In November 2025, the USPTO issued revised guidance on inventorship for AI-assisted inventions, rescinding its prior Pannu-factor-based approach. AI systems are treated as tools analogous to laboratory equipment; natural persons using AI tools remain sole inventors and AI cannot be a co-inventor. The revised guidance removes Pannu factors from AI analysis, Pannu factors only apply to multiple natural persons, not to AI-human inventorship questions. Autonomous AI inventions (created entirely by autonomous AI without human direction) remain non-patentable. This clarification significantly reduces compliance friction for engineering teams using AI tools (ChatGPT, GitHub Copilot, ML-based design software) in developing control algorithms, circuit designs, and mechanical designs. Engineering teams can now confidently document AI tool usage without fear that extensive AI assistance will disqualify natural-person inventors.

[Source]

China - Revised Patent Examination Guidelines (November 13, 2025, Effective January 1, 2026)

The China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) issued finalized Patent Examination Guidelines (effective January 1, 2026) introducing significant changes affecting engineering patents. All inventor identity information must be provided and verified at filing. Excess-page fees have been eliminated for sequence listings in WIPO Standard ST.26 format. Applicants must abandon utility model upon invention patent allowance-eliminating flexibility to maintain both filings. Features not contributing to solving the technical problem no longer support inventiveness. For Chinese engineering applicants, the November 2025 announcement forces strategic portfolio recalibration and requires re-evaluation of dual-filing strategies.

[Source]

Deep Dive of the Trending Cases

India

Warner Music Group has resolved its copyright dispute with AI-music startup Udio, and the two will now collaborate on a licensed song-generation platform set to launch in 2026. The service will use AI models trained only on authorized catalogues, creating new revenue streams for artists while avoiding the legal risks that sparked the original lawsuit. The settlement comes shortly after Universal Music reached a similar deal with Udio, as record labels move from confrontation to controlled partnerships. The broader backdrop is a rapid rise in AI-generated tracks, intense litigation against Udio and rival Suno, and new research showing that most listeners struggle to distinguish human music from AI-generated compositions.

DLL Analysis: This settlement signals a major shift in how the music industry plans to deal with generative AI. Instead of fighting every infringement claim to the end, labels are starting to see strategic value in licensing their catalogues to build AI tools that they can monitor, monetize and shape. For artists and rights owners, this represents a pragmatic middle path: AI models can still innovate, but only within a framework where use of sound recordings is authorized and revenue flows back to creators.

For AI companies, the deal sets a commercial template that may become the industry norm: licensed training data, transparent provenance of outputs, and joint ventures rather than adversarial litigation. It also strengthens the argument that fair use will not be the safe harbor many startups hoped for, especially when training involves vast libraries of hit recordings.

With consumer research showing that nearly all listeners cannot reliably tell the difference between AI-made and human-made songs, the stakes are rising quickly. Labels are racing to protect catalogues, AI firms are scrambling to legitimize their models, and regulators are watching closely. The Warner-Udio partnership is an early example of the music industry's likely future: AI is here to stay, but only on terms that rights holders can control and profit from.

[Source]

Visage Beauty And Healthcare Private vs Freecia Professional India Private

The plaintiff complained that the defendant's Proads facial kits had copied not only its trademarks D TAN, DERMOMELAN and SHINE AND GLOW but also the layout, ingredients description and steps to use appearing on its O3 plus product line. Visage provided detailed product comparisons demonstrating identical textual content and packaging arrangement. The defendant initially contested the suit but later went ex parte and claimed in its pleadings that the marks were descriptive and that the packaging elements followed a common industry pattern.

The Court examined the products and found that the defendant had copied the plaintiff's literary content and visual layout almost verbatim. The claim that the steps and ingredients were standard industry practice was rejected because the defendant failed to produce any clear evidence of similar use by third parties. The Court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendant from using the plaintiff's packaging layout, ingredients descriptions and steps to use, and from using the mark DERMOMELAN in any form. It declined to restrain use of the phrase Shine and Glowing Skin on the ground that it was descriptive.

DLL Analysis: The ruling highlights the strong protection courts extend to packaging content and artistic presentation, especially in the cosmetics and personal care sector. Literary elements such as stepwise instructions and composition lists can qualify as original works when carefully curated and arranged. For brand owners, this judgment underscores the value of documenting packaging development, as it can support both copyright and trademark claims. For competitors, it signals that close imitation of packaging or textual material may trigger swift injunctions even when marks appear descriptive.

[Source]

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd vs Artura Pharmaceuticals P. Ltd

The dispute involved Sun Pharma's marks PEPFIZ and REVITAL, which it claimed were infringed by Artura's use of PEPFIX and NEOVITAL in brochures, online listings and product materials, creating a likelihood of confusion. Artura sought return of the plaint, arguing that the Delhi High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction since it operated only from Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh and supplied mainly for export. The Court held that, at the preliminary stage, the plaint's averments must be accepted as true, and Sun Pharma had clearly pleaded that Artura's website displayed the impugned marks and enabled consumer interaction accessible in Delhi. Applying established online activity tests, the Court found that even minimal interactivity can confer jurisdiction, dismissed Artura's challenge, and allowed the matter to proceed to trial.

DLL Analysis: The decision reinforces that in digital commerce matters, courts will closely consider online presence and consumer outreach when determining jurisdiction. Even where the defendant claims to operate only for export, any publicly accessible platform showing the impugned mark can attract legal scrutiny. Brand owners should treat all web content, including catalogues and product pages, as potential jurisdictional hooks, while defendants must ensure that online visibility aligns with their claimed business footprint.

[Source]

Madras High Court - Ab Initio v. Controller of Patents (November 4, 2025)

The Madras High Court allowed an appeal by Ab Initio Technology LLC, a US-based company, against the Patent Office's refusal and directed that the patent application be allowed on November 4, 2025. The invention relates to a method of retrieving, tracing, and visually representing complete upstream and downstream data lineage. The single bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy held that patent applications relating to Computer Related Inventions (CRI), even without novel hardware or impact on internal hardware working, would not be excluded under Section 3(k) if such CRI makes a technical contribution or has a technical effect. The Court concluded that the invention involved an inventive step to satisfy Section 2(1)(j) requirement and is not excluded as a "computer programme per se" under Section 3(k). This ruling is significant for engineering and automation software inventions, expanding patentability beyond strict hardware-only requirements.

DLL Analysis: This judgment represents a critical interpretive shift for software and automation engineering patents in India. The decision clarifies that Section 3(k)'s exclusion of "computer programmes per se" does not apply when the software innovation demonstrates a technical contribution or technical effect, regardless of whether it modifies underlying hardware. For engineering and automation software companies, this ruling substantially expands patentability beyond strict hardware-dependent inventions. Applicants should prioritize claims emphasizing technical effect: improved data processing efficiency, novel algorithmic architecture for data tracing, or technological improvements in system performance. The decision validates claims directed to software-implemented methods in IoT, industrial automation, robotics control systems, and distributed computing platforms. Patent drafting strategies should focus on articulating the technical problem solved and the technical effect achieved, even when hardware modifications are absent. This judgment signals India's receptiveness to modern software-intensive engineering innovations and positions India as a favorable jurisdiction for cloud computing, AI-assisted automation, and digital infrastructure patents.

[Source]

Delhi High Court - Trident Limited "Air Rich" Yarn Patent (November 24, 2025)

The Delhi High Court on November 24, 2025, overturned a Patent Office decision that refused Trident Limited a patent for its "air rich" yarn and fabric technology. Justice Tejas Karia held that the Patent Office had not provided a sufficient basis for concluding that Trident's invention lacked an inventive step. The High Court disagreed with the Patent Office's rejection and pointed out that it had not explained why a skilled person would choose the specific fiber ratios claimed by Trident or how the earlier documents taught the same pore pattern. The Court noted that the Patent Office had overlooked detailed examples in the patent specification describing how consistent pore distribution could be achieved. This judgment is significant for textile and materials engineering patents, highlighting the importance of detailed specification disclosure and examples in supporting inventive-step claims.

DLL Analysis: The judgment strengthens India's high evidentiary threshold for rejecting textile and materials patents on inventive-step grounds and requires examiners to clearly link prior art to claimed features with a justified motivation to combine. It highlights the value of data-rich specifications, including detailed examples, experimental results, and controlled parameters such as fiber ratios and pore distribution. The ruling signals that thorough drafting and strong R&D documentation are essential, and that courts will closely scrutinize cursory inventive-step rejections lacking technical reasoning.

[Source]

Globally

EPO Board of Appeal - T 1495/23 (Cigarette Tow Band-Parameter-Based Claims, November 10, 2025)

The EPO Technical Board of Appeal (Tech. Board 3.2.01) heard oral proceedings on November 10, 2025, addressing a patent directed to a tow band for electronic cigarette tips with a specific F/TD ratio (breaking force divided by titre/linear density). The Opposition Division had rejected the patent for lack of enablement and sufficiency under Article 83 EPC, arguing that the claimed F/TD ratio range could not be reliably reproduced by the skilled person using common knowledge. The Board of Appeal upheld the patent against the enablement challenge, finding that the specification sufficiently disclosed enabling technical content for the skilled person to reproduce the claimed F/TD ratio ranges. The Board emphasized that derived parameters (like F/TD ratio) can form valid claim elements provided the underlying process and materials are clearly disclosed. This decision is critical for materials and manufacturing patents, including composite and fiber-reinforced materials, electronics manufacturing, energy devices, and mechanical component design. When claiming functional or empirical parameters, applicants must clearly disclose the underlying material composition and process parameters, provide sufficient data tables and experimental results showing how claimed parameter ranges are achieved, and avoid treating derived parameters as independently "tunable" without showing control levers.

DLL Analysis: For materials, composites, and manufacturing patents, functional performance claims are viable if supported by detailed process disclosures and data tables. Vague references to "conventional methods" will not satisfy enablement. Specifications must be comprehensive and empirically grounded.

[Source]

Amgen Files BPCIA Complaints Against Dr. Reddy's/Alvotech and Amneal Regarding Denosumab Biosimilars

Amgen initiated a fresh round of BPCIA litigation by filing two new suits concerning denosumab biosimilars, one against Dr. Reddy's Labor­atories and Alvotech and another against Amneal Pharmaceuticals. Both suits were prompted by the FDA's acceptance of BLAs earlier in 2025 for the biosimilar candidates MB09 and AVT03, each referencing Amgen's marketed biologics PROLIA and XGEVA. The complaints assert a portfolio of thirty one patents, mostly overlapping across the two cases, covering composition, formulation and manufacturing aspects of denosumab. Amgen further alleged that all defendants failed to meet their statutory obligations under section 262 of the BPCIA by withholding complete manufacturing information during the patent dance, particularly the details describing processes used to produce their biological products.

Amgen requested findings of infringement, a permanent injunction to prevent commercial launch until the expiry of the asserted patents and monetary relief for post verdict infringement. These filings represent the ninth and tenth denosumab litigations initiated by Amgen, following earlier cases against Sandoz, Celltrion, Samsung, Fresenius, Accord, Hikma, Shanghai Henlius and Biocon Biologics. Most of the earlier matters have already settled, highlighting the high stakes associated with biosimilar entry into the osteoporosis and oncology supportive care markets where denosumab remains a major revenue driver.

DLL Analysis: The case illustrates how originator biologic companies use broad patent portfolios and BPCIA procedures to shape biosimilar competition, with manufacturing disclosures remaining a key pressure point that can trigger non-compliance arguments and injunction requests. For biosimilar developers, it underscores the need for clear process documentation and early technical positioning to reduce exposure to expansive patent assertions. The matter also shows that denosumab is emerging as one of the most heavily litigated biologic markets in the United States, requiring future entrants to prepare for prolonged, multi-front patent challenges.

[Source]

Litigation Highlights & Practice Area

Delhi High Court Bars Look-Alike Nutella Jars; ₹10 Lakh Costs Imposed

The Delhi High Court has issued a permanent injunction against a Firozabad based manufacturer for producing empty glass jars that closely resembled Ferrero's registered Nutella jar shape. The Court held that the imitation was deceptively similar and infringed Ferrero's proprietary design. It ordered the defendants to surrender over 3.05 lakh seized jars to Ferrero and to pay ₹10 lakh towards legal costs. The ruling reinforces strong protection for shape based trademarks and trade dress in India.

DLL Analysis: The decision is a powerful and much-needed affirmation of India's dedication to upholding trade dress rights and shape trademarks, indicating that even the production of empty, identical containers may be considered infringement when the shape is unique and registered. The Court has gone beyond a standard injunction and established a clear deterrent against design mimicry by ordering the surrender of the infringing stock and imposing ₹10 lakh in costs. This has brought Indian practice into line with international standards that treat iconic product shapes as valuable brand identifiers. This ruling may force manufacturers to do more research before implementing container designs that could deceive customers or dilute proprietary trade dress, and it should encourage rights holders to rely more confidently on shape-based protection.

[Source]

Delhi High Court: No Passing Off Without Goodwill in the Relevant Trade

The Delhi High Court dismissed Suparshva Swabs India's passing off claim against AGN International over the marks “TULIPS” and “AGN TULIP,” holding that Suparshva had no goodwill in the perfume market. Its reputation was limited to hygiene products, and it provided no evidence of consumer association in fragrances. The Court also found “TULIP” descriptive for perfumes and rejected the argument that perfumes and hygiene items are allied goods. With no protectable goodwill or well known status, the Court found no likelihood of deception and allowed AGN to continue using “AGN TULIP.”

DLL Analysis: The ruling accurately upholds the fundamental idea that passing off is impossible without established goodwill in the particular market where protection is sought. Without proof of consumer association, Suparshva Swabs' attempt to expand its reputation from hygiene products into the perfume category would have essentially given it a monopoly over a descriptive term ("TULIP") in an unrelated industry, which the Court correctly rejected. The ruling preserves clarity in passing-off jurisprudence and stops brand owners from overextending rights beyond their established commercial footprint by refusing to treat perfumes and hygiene products as allied goods and stressing the need for market-specific goodwill and distinctiveness.

[Source]

Delhi High Court Restrains ‘Club Anantara' for Using Similar Mark

The Delhi High Court has granted ad interim relief to the luxury ANANTARA hotel chain by restraining Club Anantara Suites and Retreat from using “Anantara,” “Club Anantara,” and related domain names. The Court found the marks deceptively similar and likely to mislead consumers, noting that MHG IP Holding Singapore, which owns the ANANTARA IP portfolio, had established prior use and reputation.

DLL Analysis: The Court's ruling demonstrates a sensible and consistent application of trademark principles, especially in industries like hospitality where consumer trust and brand reputation are crucial to market positioning. The adoption of extremely similar marks like "Club Anantara" created a clear risk of Source confusion and free-riding on the goodwill of a luxury brand, given ANANTARA's established worldwide presence and previous use. The Court successfully stopped additional dilution of a well-known hotel chain's identity by granting ad interim relief and prohibiting use of both the marks and related domain names. This also served as a warning that opportunistic adoption of nearly identical marks, particularly in the same industry, will result in prompt judicial intervention.

[Source]

Bombay High Court Grants Interim Relief to Asian Paints

The Bombay High Court has restrained a rival manufacturer from using the marks “ASIANGOLD” and “SUPREME GLOSS,” holding them deceptively similar to Asian Paints' trademarks and packaging. The Court confirmed an earlier injunction, noting the competitor's branding appeared to exploit Asian Paints' reputation.

DLL Analysis: The Bombay High Court's order underlined the fact that trade dress and branding are protected IP rights and misleading marks like "ASIANGOLD" and "SUPREME GLOSS" cannot exploit established goodwill. It signals that Indian courts provide fast relief against the imitation of brands and consumer confusion.

[Source]

Bombay High Court Restrains Use of ‘METRO FOOTWEAR'; Well-Known Mark Issue to Follow

The Bombay High Court has granted a temporary injunction restraining METRO FOOTWEAR from using the impugned mark, holding that it infringed the registered trade mark ‘METRO'. The Court noted that the plaintiff had continuously used the mark since 1955, with formal registration in 1972, giving it an exclusive right under the Trade Marks Act. The defendants' claim of prior use from 1982 was unsupported by evidence, and the Court found the adoption of METRO FOOTWEAR likely to cause passing off in the same class of goods. The injunction restrains the defendants from manufacturing or selling goods under the impugned mark, while the question of whether ‘METRO' qualifies as a well-known mark will be determined later.

DLL Analysis: The Bombay High Court's temporary order against METRO FOOTWEAR emphasizes that long-term use and registration provide enforceable trademark rights. Using a similar mark in the same category can likely lead to confusion and misrepresentation. This situation calls for quick action while the status of the mark is being assessed.

[Source]

Entrepreneur Magazine Publisher Sues Meta Over Alleged AI Training Misuse

Entrepreneur Media has filed a lawsuit in California federal court accusing Meta of using its business books, professional guides and educational materials to train the company's Llama AI models without permission. The publisher alleges Meta ingested “hundreds” of its works to help the models generate business and self-improvement content that competes directly with Entrepreneur's products. The suit argues Meta should have licensed the works rather than copying them, calling the practice an unauthorized appropriation of decades of published material. Meta has not commented on the claims. Entrepreneur is seeking damages and a court order to stop the alleged use.

DLL Analysis: The lawsuit highlights a growing clash between AI development and traditional copyright protections. Entrepreneur Media's claims raise important questions about whether the use of copyrighted texts to train AI models constitutes unauthorized reproduction or fair use, particularly when the output competes with the original works. If the court sides with Entrepreneur, it could signal that AI developers need to secure licenses for copyrighted training data, potentially reshaping how large language models are built and used. The case also underscores the tension between innovation in AI and the protection of longstanding intellectual property, setting a precedent that could affect publishers, tech companies, and content creators globally.

[Source]

Koninklijke Philips N. V. & Ors vs Karma Mindtech & Ors

On November 24, 2025, Koninklijke Philips N.V., a global technology leader, brought an IP enforcement suit against Karma Mindtech and its associates, alleging unauthorized use of Philips' proprietary medical diagnostic software. The plaintiffs asserted that the defendants had been operating diagnostic systems with unlicensed Philips programs, amounting to large scale software piracy and copyright infringement. A Local Commissioner appointed by the Court inspected the defendants' premises and, in a report dated January 12, 2024, recorded Defendant No. 2's admission of using infringing software since August 2021, confirming multiple unauthorized installations. The Court found that the defendants' conduct constituted clear infringement of Philips' intellectual property rights, stressing that continued unauthorized use of proprietary medical software undermines innovation and patient safety. Accordingly, an ex parte ad interim injunction was granted, restraining the defendants from further use of Philips' software and directing seizure of infringing systems, while underscoring Philips' longstanding reputation, global market presence, and continuous investment in research and development that warranted strong protection under Indian IP law.

DLL Analysis: Indian courts now treat software piracy as serious IP violation. Enforcement requires proactive license monitoring, commissioner-led inspections, and documented evidence. Ex parte injunctions are readily available for software infringement with clear unauthorized-use evidence.

[Source]

Pepsico Inc v Jagdamba Foods Pvt Ltd

This matter involved Pepsico's long-standing mark LAYS and its challenge to the defendant's registration of the mark JAYS in Class 30. Pepsico argued that LAYS is among its most distinctive and globally recognised snack brands, used for more than seventy five years and registered in India since 1992. The company submitted evidence of extensive sales, historical adoption, and the brand's international goodwill. The impugned mark JAYS, adopted by the Nepal-based respondent, was alleged to be phonetically and visually identical to LAYS and therefore likely to mislead consumers regarding the Source of the products.

The Court reviewed the competing marks as a whole and applied the principles laid down in earlier Supreme Court decisions on deceptive similarity. It held that JAYS reproduced the essential features of the registered mark LAYS and that phonetic resemblance alone was sufficient to create confusion. The respondent produced no justification for adopting a nearly identical mark and no evidence showing bona fide use. Concluding that the adoption was dishonest and intended to exploit the goodwill of LAYS, the Court ordered cancellation of the JAYS registration under sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act.

DLL Analysis: The decision affirms the strong protection afforded to well-known consumer brands against phonetic imitations, even when defendants operate from another jurisdiction. Courts continue to emphasize the primacy of prior use and the doctrine that imitation of essential features constitutes infringement. For FMCG companies, the ruling highlights the importance of monitoring foreign filings and taking early action against deceptively similar marks to avoid dilution of brand identity.

[Source]

Laboratoires Griffon Pvt Ltd v Adwin Pharma

The dispute centered on the plaintiff's registered trademarks GLIMET and GLIMET DS, used since the early 1990s for anti-diabetic pharmaceutical preparations. The plaintiffs discovered in 2024 that the defendants were marketing ELGIMET and ELGIMET-SR products on e-commerce platforms, prompting an action for trademark infringement and passing off. The defendants contested similarity, argued that GLIMET was derived from the active ingredients glipizide or glimepiride and metformin, and claimed that ELGIMET was honestly adopted based on the company name Elcliff. They also raised objections regarding jurisdiction and price differentiation.

The Court compared the marks from the perspective of an average consumer with imperfect recollection and held that ELGIMET was structurally and phonetically similar to GLIMET. The Court noted that slight differences in lettering do not eliminate confusion, especially for Schedule H prescription drugs used for diabetes. It rejected the defendants' argument that GLIMET lacked distinctiveness, explaining that while no exclusivity exists over individual active ingredients, a unique coined combination mark can still be distinctive. Finding a strong prima facie case and no credible defense of honest adoption, the Court confirmed the earlier interim injunction and restrained the defendants from manufacturing or marketing ELGIMET in any form.

DLL Analysis: This ruling reiterates that even minor variations in pharmaceutical marks can cause significant harm and that courts apply heightened scrutiny for medicinal products because patient safety is at risk. The judgment also reinforces that coined combination marks in pharma enjoy strong protection despite being derived from active ingredients. For drug manufacturers, it underscores the need for careful trademark clearance and avoidance of marks that may be read or pronounced similarly, regardless of formulation or pricing differences.

[Source]

GSP Crop Science Pvt Ltd v Mikado Crop Science Pvt Ltd

This matter related to infringement of Indian Patent No. 394568, which protects specific suspo-emulsion formulations of pyriproxyfen and diafenthiuron. GSP Crop Science alleged that the defendant's agrochemical product marketed as DYNA infringed the claims of the patent. The defendant denied infringement but stated in its written statement that it had neither manufactured nor sold the impugned formulation. It also filed an undertaking promising not to deal in any product falling within the scope of the patent during its term and to notify the plaintiff of any third-party enquiries relating to such formulations. Given this undertaking, the defendant expressed no objection to a decree of permanent injunction restraining it from making, selling or distributing any infringing formulations. The Court accepted this position and granted a permanent injunction in terms of the relief sought. However, the plaintiff highlighted that packaging and product samples were recovered during a local commissioner's inspection and that DYNA listings appeared on both the defendant's website and a third-party e-commerce platform. The Court accepted this as requiring further inquiry and issued notice to the platform to disclose whether any sales had occurred.

DLL Analysis: The case demonstrates how undertakings can streamline patent enforcement in agrochemical disputes, allowing courts to grant immediate injunctive relief while reserving factual issues for later determination. It also shows that online listings and digital footprints can influence judicial assessment of infringement even when defendants claim zero sales. For patentees, the order reinforces the value of proactive evidence collection through local commissioners and monitoring of e-commerce channels as part of enforcement strategy.

[Source]

Global Developments

Stanley Cup Maker Sues Five Below for Copycat Tumblers

Pacific Market International, owner of the viral Stanley 1913 tumbler line, has sued discount retailer Five Below in California federal court, alleging the company sold cheap “dupes” that copy the design and trade dress of its popular insulated cups. PMI claims the low-cost versions infringe both its design patents and its trademark rights, arguing that Five Below is capitalizing on the explosive success of Stanley tumblers, which helped drive the brand's revenue to $750 million in 2023. PMI is seeking damages and an order stopping Five Below from selling the lookalike products.

DLL Analysis:  Pacific Market International, maker of Stanley tumblers, has sued Five Below in California federal court alleging that the retailer's low-cost “dupe” drinkware infringes its design patents and trademarks. PMI seeks damages and an injunction, claiming Five Below's copies undercut its Stanley 1913 brand, whose viral popularity has driven major revenue growth.

[Source]

A Munich regional court ruled that OpenAI breached German copyright law by training its models on lyrics from nine songs by Herbert Groenemeyer and other artists.

The case, brought by German rights society GEMA, argued that ChatGPT was able to reproduce protected lyrics from hits like “Maenner” and “Bochum” because OpenAI had ingested them during training. The court rejected OpenAI's defense that its models do not store or copy specific works and that responsibility lies with users who prompt the output. It held that both the model's internal memorization and ChatGPT's lyric reproduction infringe copyright, ordering OpenAI to pay damages. The ruling could become a major European precedent, reinforcing that AI developers must secure rights before training on copyrighted works. GEMA hailed it as a reminder that creative works are not “free templates,” while OpenAI said it disagrees and may appeal. The decision adds to a growing global wave of music-industry challenges to AI training practices, including ongoing litigation in India and the US.

DLL Analysis: A Munich court ruled that OpenAI's ChatGPT infringed German copyright by reproducing lyrics from several protected songs, holding that both model training and lyric output violated rights despite OpenAI's defense that the system does not store specific data. The case, brought by GEMA, may set a European precedent, with the court ordering damages and affirming that AI developers must comply with copyright law.

[Source]

World's Largest IP Survey Reveals Increased Awareness and Trust in IP

The WIPO Pulse 2025 survey reports the highest global levels of IP awareness and trust since tracking began, based on responses from over thirty five thousand people across seventy four countries. Understanding of all major IP rights has increased since 2023, with notable gains in the Asia Pacific region and strong improvements among women and youth, while patents and designs remain the least understood categories. Western Europe also shows upward movement, although youth awareness has declined in parts of Latin America, the Caribbean and Eastern Europe. Across regions, public confidence in IP's role in rewarding creators, supporting innovation and strengthening consumer trust remains strong, and overall perceptions of IP as an economic barrier have slightly decreased.

DLL Analysis: Asia Pacific recorded the strongest rise in awareness across all IP rights, with significant gains among women and youth, while Western Europe also improved and some regions, including Latin America and Eastern Europe, saw declines in youth awareness. Trust in IP systems remains robust worldwide, with broad agreement that IP rewards creators and supports consumer confidence. Perceptions of IP as an economic barrier have decreased slightly, reinforcing growing global confidence in the value of IP protection.

[Source]

Influencers recognize risks of promoting pirated content and counterfeits

The EUIPO's new study “Influencers and IP” shows that influencers across the European Union increasingly recognize the risks of promoting counterfeit goods and pirated content, with over ninety percent reporting that they actively avoid such material and verify brand legitimacy before posting. Although content creation has become a professional activity for most influencers, only a small share own registered IP rights, and those who do tend to operate more advanced businesses with established brands and online stores. The study also highlights growing reliance on artificial intelligence, with more than half of influencers using AI tools while expressing concerns about misuse of their content, unfair competition from virtual influencers and the possibility of unintentional IP infringement. In response, the EUIPO is expanding training, awareness programmes and legal reSources through initiatives such as the Influencer Legal Hub, with plans for a follow up study to monitor how creators engage with IP in an evolving digital environment.

[Source]

USPTO and DOJ Warn Against Using Public Interest as Barrier to Patent Enforcement at ITC

The USPTO and the U.S. Department of Justice jointly urged the U.S. International Trade Commission not to treat public-interest considerations as a barrier to patent enforcement, arguing that exclusion orders should remain the presumptive remedy for infringement under Section 337. In their filing, the agencies stressed that strong and reliable patent rights are essential to American innovation, economic growth and technological leadership, noting that IP-intensive industries contribute roughly forty percent of U.S. GDP. They warned that weakening enforcement by overusing public-interest exceptions would undermine the innovation ecosystem, which historically has allowed exceptions only in rare circumstances involving public health or safety. The agencies emphasized that public-interest analysis should occur only after infringement and validity are established, reinforcing that enforcing valid patents ordinarily serves the public good and protects the incentives required for continued technological progress.

DLL Analysis: The USPTO and DOJ told the ITC that strong, predictable patent enforcement best serves the public interest and that exclusion orders should remain the default remedy for infringement. They warned against using public-interest factors as early procedural barriers, stressing that such exceptions apply only in extraordinary cases involving concrete health or safety concerns. The agencies argued that assessing public interest should occur only after validity and infringement are established, as weakening remedies would harm the broader innovation ecosystem.

[Source]

Ex parte Desjardins

USPTO Director Makes AI Patent Eligibility Decision Precedential: USPTO Director John Squires designated the Ex-parte Desjardins decision as precedential, ensuring that it's reasoning now binds all patent examiners and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The decision marks a significant shift in USPTO policy regarding AI and software patent eligibility. The Desjardins decision establishes that improvements to machine learning models can constitute patent-eligible technological advancements under the Alice framework. By making the decision precedential, Director Squires formally embedded this reasoning into USPTO policy, confirming that improvements to ML models qualify as eligible subject matter. Examiners and PTAB panels must now apply Desjardins when evaluating AI-related claims, rather than reflexively treating them as unpatentable algorithms. Additionally, Squires reaffirmed that 102, 103, and 112 (novelty, non-obviousness, and enablement), not 101, are the proper tools for defining the scope of patent protection. This focus may curb the overuse of § 101 rejections and redirect examination toward traditional questions of patentability. For engineering companies developing AI-assisted automation, robotics, control systems, and mechanical design optimization tools, the Desjardins precedential designation offers greater clarity and predictability for navigating subject-matter eligibility at the USPTO.

DLL analysis:  Watershed moment for AI-intensive engineering patents at USPTO. Applicants should emphasize technical problem, algorithmic innovation, and measurable performance metrics. Specifications must include experimental data. AI/robotics/automation portfolios now face improved U.S. prosecution predictability.

[Source]

EPO & ETSI Renew Cooperation - High-Level Strategic Meeting

The European Patent Office and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute held their first high-level strategic meeting, renewing their Memorandum of Understanding and signing a 3-year Work Plan. The EPO VP for Legal & International Affairs (Christoph Ernst) and ETSI Director-General (Jan Ellsberger) established a SEP Transparency Initiative with direct data links between ETSI's IPR database and EPO patent tools (Espacenet, PATSTAT, Technology Intelligence Platform). For engineering patent holders in telecommunications, 5G/6G, digital communication, and standards-based sectors, SEP Filers should ensure patents are declared and registered with ETSI; EPO-ETSI data integration will increase visibility and licensing inquiry rates. Competitors and implementers gain clearer mapping of SEP landscapes, supporting freedom-to-operate assessments and FRAND rate benchmarking.

DLL analysis: SEP holders must ensure timely ETSI declarations. Competitors gain enhanced FTO mapping and comparable-rate data for FRAND negotiation. Heightened transparency reduces information asymmetry, favoring implementers. European regulators view SEP transparency as critical for fair competition.

[Source]

Transactional IP

• LG Electronics Wi-Fi SEP License to Amazon: LG Electronics announced a patent license agreement with Amazon, granting use of LG's Wi-Fi standard essential patents for Amazon's IoT and cloud computing devices. LG formalized this license as part of corporate strategy to monetize its industry-leading Wi-Fi patent portfolio through structured licensing rather than litigation. The agreement underscores LG's pivot toward IP-driven business value creation. [Source]

• OPPO Licenses 4G/5G SEPs to Chinese Automaker: OPPO Inc. announced that it granted a license for cellular 4G/5G standard essential patents to an unnamed Chinese automotive OEM engaged in overseas market expansion on November 4, 2025. This license emerged as Chinese automakers face SEP litigation from Nokia, Ericsson and other telecoms patent holders. The rise of intra-China SEP licensing between mobile and automotive OEMs is reshaping global licensing dynamics. [Source]

• TRIPS Council explores technology transfer, pandemic preparedness, digital infrastructure: WTO members met at the TRIPS Council on 10–11 November to discuss technology transfer, pandemic preparedness, digital public infrastructure and ongoing implementation of the TRIPS Agreement. Delegations highlighted voluntary technology-transfer initiatives, lessons from COVID-19, and the role of mechanisms like the Medicines Patent Pool in improving access to medicines. Members also reviewed submissions on empowering women in IP, debated the TRIPS–CBD relationship in light of the new WIPO Treaty on Genetic ReSources and continued discussions on non-violation complaints ahead of MC14. The meeting underscored persistent differences over TRIPS reforms while maintaining momentum on transparency, legislative notifications and thematic cooperation with WIPO. [Source]

• Advancing Innovation with Openness: Huawei holds the 6th Innovation and IP Forum: Huawei's sixth Innovation and Intellectual Property Forum highlighted the company's expanding role in global innovation, announcing its latest Top Ten Inventions across computing, HarmonyOS and storage while emphasizing a commitment to open innovation and strong IP protection. Speakers from WIPO, INTA and LES International underscored Huawei's leadership in global patent activity, including 6,600 PCT filings in 2024 and more than 37,000 published patents that year, along with major contributions to standards and open-Source platforms such as OpenHarmony and openEuler. Huawei reported USD 630 million in patent licensing revenue in 2024 and noted that billions of devices across 5G, Wi-Fi and multimedia technologies operate under its licensed patents. The forum also introduced new AI-powered updates to Huawei's free Chaspark Patent search platform and reaffirmed industrywide support for a robust, collaborative and globally trusted IP ecosystem. [Source]

Technology & IP Convergence

Engineering Buzz

Perrone Robotics v. Global Automakers: Autonomous Vehicle Patent Litigation: Perrone Robotics filed coordinated patent infringement lawsuits against seven major automakers in U.S. federal courts in late November 2025, alleging infringement of autonomous vehicle control and navigation patents. The multi-defendant, simultaneous filing strategy signals confidence in a broad patent estate covering fundamental AV steering, braking and sensor fusion logic.

[Source]

Biotech Buzz

• Biosimilar Litigation Intensifying in High Value Therapeutic Areas: Biosimilar disputes are escalating, with Amgen's denosumab actions showing aggressive use of broad patent portfolios to delay competition. Manufacturing process details remain a key pressure point during the patent dance. Denosumab is now among the most litigated biologics, signalling increasingly challenging entry pathways for biosimilar developers.
• Pharma Trademark Enforcement Becoming Stricter: Courts are adopting stricter scrutiny in pharma trademark cases due to patient safety concerns. Even minor phonetic similarities, as seen in GLIMET vs ELGIMET, are enough to trigger injunctions. Coined or combination marks are receiving strong protection, even when derived from active ingredients.

Innovation Spotlight

Siemens Mobility Landmark Contract & Industrial AI Breakthrough

Siemens announced on November 27, 2025, a landmark contract for Siemens Mobility, coupled with breakthrough innovations in industrial AI and digital twin technologies. The company unveiled new capabilities combining AI algorithms with physics-based simulation for autonomous systems, transportation infrastructure, and industrial automation accelerating deployment cycles while reducing carbon emissions and operational costs.

IP Implication: The convergence of industrial AI, digital twins, and autonomous systems broadens patentable subject-matter to include AI-powered simulation algorithms, real-time digital twin architectures, autonomous control systems for transportation and industrial assets, and physics-integrated machine-learning frameworks, signaling a new frontier for engineering innovation across mobility, infrastructure, and manufacturing sectors.

[Source]

ASE IDE 2.0 - AI-Enhanced Semiconductor Package Design Platform (November 2025)

Advanced Semiconductor Engineering (ASE) announced the launch of IDE 2.0, an AI-enhanced upgrade to its Integrated Design Ecosystem™, designed to accelerate semiconductor package design cycles. The platform leverages cloud-based e-Simulator and AI engines to provide real-time design-analysis feedback across electrical, thermal, stress, and reliability domains. IDE 2.0 reportedly reduces design cycles from 14 days to approximately 30 minutes, dramatically accelerating chip-package interaction (CPI) analysis for complex AI and high-performance computing packaging applications.

IP Implication: This authentic November 2025 innovation demonstrates convergence of AI, simulation algorithms, and semiconductor manufacturing engineering. Patent opportunities emerge in: (1) AI-accelerated thermal and stress analysis algorithms; (2) cloud-based e-Simulator architecture for package design; (3) chip-package interaction prediction models; (4) real-time multi-domain optimization frameworks. ASE's IDE 2.0 platform exemplifies how AI-assisted design automation is becoming a critical competitive differentiator in semiconductor manufacturing. Patent strategies must now encompass algorithmic optimization, cloud infrastructure, and domain-specific ML models alongside traditional packaging patents.

[Source]

Filing Trends

WIPO Global Patent Filings Reach New Records: According to the report, patenting activity grew 4.9 percent during 2024 in a fifth year of growth and global design filings rose 2.2%. Worldwide trademark applications showed signs of recovery following a two-year slowdown - ending the year essentially flat.

World Intellectual Property Indicators: Global Patent and Design Filings Reach New Records in 2024, Trademarks Flat: Global IP filing activity reached new records in 2024, with patent applications rising to 3.7 million, a 4.9 percent increase driven largely by China, India, the Republic of Korea and Japan, while global design filings grew 2.2 percent to 1.6 million. Trademark activity remained stable at 15.2 million classes after two years of decline, with strong growth from Brazil, India and the Russian Federation offsetting decreases in China and the United States. India stood out with its sixth consecutive year of double-digit patent filing growth and a forty five percent jump in design filings. WIPO attributed these trends to sustaining global confidence in the IP system and the central role of IP in promoting innovation, economic growth and brand competitiveness.

[Source]

IP in the Wild - Pop Culture & Business

Madras High Court Reopens Dispute Over Classic South Indian Film Music Rights

The Madras High Court has revived Sreedevi Video Corporation's copyright dispute against Saregama India over audio rights to iconic Tamil and Telugu films including Sagara Sangamam, Salangai Oli, Shankarabharanam and Sitara. Although Sreedevi's request for a declaration of ownership was time barred, the Court held that its claim for a permanent injunction must still be assessed on merits.

DLL Analysis: The dispute reflects a broader industry pattern: legacy film catalogues are becoming commercially valuable again due to streaming, remastering and digital licensing. Courts are increasingly asked to revisit decades old assignments, where documentation is incomplete or rights were split across producers, distributors and music labels. The ruling underscores that limitation bars may not extinguish all relief, and injunction claims involving enduring cultural works can remain actionable even when ownership declarations are time-barred.

[Source]

ABKCO Sues Behr Paint Over Rolling Stones Song in Instagram Ad

Record label ABKCO Music has filed a copyright infringement suit against Behr Paint in the California federal court, alleging that the company used the Rolling Stones' classic “Paint It, Black” in a 2022 Instagram post without obtaining a license. The post featured a DIY home bar painted with Behr products and used the song as background audio. ABKCO said it discovered the use in June 2025 and notified Behr in August, but the company declined further discussions. The label argues that Behr, a sophisticated commercial advertiser, routinely licenses music but failed to do so here, creating an unauthorized brand association. ABKCO seeks monetary damages.

DLL Analysis: This dispute highlights how social media posts are treated as full-fledged commercial advertising, carrying the same licensing requirements as traditional campaigns. Brands cannot assume that short-form or casual content falls under lighter rules; any use of popular music invites scrutiny. The case also shows rights-holders' increasing willingness to enforce against legacy catalogue misuse, even years after publication, as posts remain discoverable and continue to generate consumer impressions. For marketers and agencies, this serves as a reminder to integrate music clearance into all digital content workflows and avoid relying on the informal nature of platforms like Instagram or TikTok. For rights-holders, the case reinforces control over brand associations and signals that unauthorized sync use, no matter how brief, remains a high-risk area for advertisers.

[Source]

Bob Mackie Sues JCPenney Over Unauthorized “Mackie” Apparel Line

Legendary designer Bob Mackie has filed suit in Manhattan federal court after JCPenney launched a “Mackie: Bob Mackie” apparel line without his approval. Mackie says he was never consulted despite owning 40 percent of the Bob Mackie Design Group, the entity that partnered with JCPenney on the collection. He argues the retailer leveraged his name, signature, and Hollywood reputation, especially around the release of Taylor Swift's new album, which features a Mackie-designed costume, to market products he had no involvement in. Mackie claims the collection could dilute his prestige and mislead consumers, and has brought additional claims against the design group and its majority owner for alleged mismanagement. JCPenney has not commented, while the design group maintains it had full licensing authority. Mackie seeks damages under false association, false advertising, and right-of-publicity laws.

DLL Analysis: The dispute underscores rising sensitivities around celebrity branding, where unauthorized or loosely governed collaborations risk reputational dilution for legacy creators like Mackie. It highlights internal licensing tensions, particularly who controls the mark and how governance failures can enable public-facing misuse. Courts will focus on whether consumers would assume Mackie endorsed the products, a key issue in false association and publicity claims. For brands, the case is a reminder that designer names require clear authority, tight licensing structures and alignment with the creator's market identity.

[Source]

Jiostar India Pvt. Ltd. vs Cricfy TV & Ors

Jiostar India filed a suit to protect its exclusive broadcast reproduction rights over upcoming BCCI cricket events, alleging that rogue streaming apps such as Cricfy TV were preparing to illegally stream the matches without authorization. The plaintiff demonstrated that these apps had previously disseminated cricket content and were likely to infringe again during the South Africa Tour of India 2025 and New Zealand Tour of India 2026. The Court, noting the urgency of live broadcasts, granted an ex parte ad interim injunction restraining the apps and associated websites from hosting, streaming or communicating any part of the events.

Domain name registrars and internet service providers were directed to block and suspend specified URLs, and the Department of Telecommunications and MeitY were instructed to ensure compliance. The Court also permitted real-time dynamic blocking of any newly discovered infringing websites during the tournament period.

DLL Analysis: The order reflects the Court's continued use of Dynamic and injunctions to combat large scale digital piracy of live sports broadcasts, ensuring real-time protection of broadcast rights. It also highlights the increasing reliance on coordinated blocking through domain registrars, ISPs and government agencies to contain fast-migrating rogue streaming platforms.

[Source]

Saregama India Ltd. vs En.Ssyou.Tube & Ors

Saregama sued a network of over 23 stream-ripping websites that enabled users to extract, download and permanently store copyrighted music and sound recordings from licensed platforms such as YouTube. The plaintiff showed that its extensive musical catalogue was being systematically converted into downloadable files through stream-ripping tools that circumvented technological protection measures and diverted users from legitimate streaming services.

The Court found that such services caused significant commercial harm by enabling unauthorized reproduction, storage and distribution of copyrighted works, and by disrupting subscription-based streaming models. An ex parte ad interim injunction was granted restraining defendants from facilitating stream ripping of Saregama's works. The Court further ordered domain name registrars to lock and suspend infringing domains and required ISPs to disable access to listed URLs.

DLL Analysis: This ruling strengthens enforcement against stream-ripping ecosystems, recognising their direct impact on monetization models of licensed platforms and rights holders. The order also reinforces judicial acceptance of coordinated blocking measures and proactive disclosure obligations to suppress repeat infringers in the digital piracy landscape.

[Source]

Quick Wins & ReSources

Podcast Pick: “Transformative Landscapes: How Generative AI is Shaping the Contours of US Copyright Law and Policy: CIPIL Evening Seminar”: This podcast breaks down one of the biggest legal questions of the year: is training generative AI on copyrighted works fair use? It walks through the major US lawsuits against OpenAI, Meta, Anthropic and ROSS Intelligence, explains how courts are testing substantial similarity and new theories like market dilution, and explores whether AI companies could face vicarious liability. It ends with what Congress might change next, including proposals to block AI training on shadow library material. Perfect for anyone who wants to understand where the fight is headed and what risks AI companies and creators should be watching.

[Source]

Must Read

• Artificial Intelligence in Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals: Evolution, Applications, and Regulatory Frontiers [Source]
• The future of AI regulation in drug development: a comparative analysis [Source]
• Challenges and prospects in granting patent rights to AI-generated inventions: a global legal study with special reference to the UAE [Source]
• AI, copyright, and business: navigating global legal challenges in the era of generative content and digital replicas [Source]
• Who Owns the Knowledge? Copyright, GenAI, and the Future of Academic Publishing [Source]

Upcoming IP Events

• CII Global Summit on Technology, R&D & Intellectual Property, 16-17 December 2025 [Source]
• International Conference on Intellectual Property Law and Human Rights, December 26, 2025 [Source]
• Regional Meeting on Industrial Property (IP) and Gender Equality, 10-12 December 2025 [Source]
• The Trademark Day, Stockolm – Sweden, Jan 16, 2026. Varumärkesdagen (Trademark Registered) - Insight Events/ Groth & Co. [Source]
• IIPLA 2026 Dubai (Worldwide) Jan. 19–20, 2026 (Dubai). International IP Law Association's annual conference, with 200+ IP professionals. [Source]
• Global IP Exchange, USA – Jan 28-29, IQPC, Austin, Texas, USA [Source]

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.