Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 JANUARY 2018

Bigtree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. vs. Brain Seed Sportainment Pvt. Ltd. & Anr

Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorneys
Explore more from Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorneys

With the rise in number of businesses using the global internet portal for running their businesses and with the increase in the number of start-ups in the current economic scenario, ...

IndiaIntellectual Property
Swatilekha Chakraborty
Swatilekha Chakraborty
Author LinkedIn connections

"A brainy person does not abuse copyright; instead he respects it and upholds it." – Maximillian Degenerez.

Introduction

With the rise in number of businesses using the global internet portal for running their businesses and with the increase in the number of start-ups in the current economic scenario, we come across many new issues that have to be dealt with in depth and have to be decided accordingly keeping in mind the far-fetched affect it would have on the domain of intellectual property right. On one such latest instance was a question posed before the High Court of Delhi when it to deal the process to determine whether a phrase is invented or descriptive. Through this article, the author would be discussing one of the latest judgments pronounced by the High Court of Delhi (hereafter, the "Court")in the matter of Bigtree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. vs. Brain Seed Sportainment Pvt. Ltd. &Anr.1

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Copy, Right? ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open AI OpCo LLC

When an artificial intelligence system is trained on copyrighted news content, and later answers a user’s question using what it learned, has the law been broken? On 24th July 2026, the Delhi High Court answered that question, at least for now. In ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open AI OpCo LLC, Justice Amit Bansal declined to grant an interim injunction against OpenAI, holding, on a prima facie, interim stage view, that the company’s use of ANI’s news content to train its large language models (“LLMs”) falls within the fair dealing exception under Section 52(1)(a) of the Copyright Act, 1957
IndiaIntellectual Property
S.S. Rana & Co.
S.S. Rana & Co.
Article

AI Training Data, Copyright Risk And Commercial Liability: What Businesses Need To Know

On 8 October 2026, USA Today Co. and its affiliated newspaper companies, which publish 19 titles including USA Today, the Detroit Free Press and The Arizona Republic, sued seven OpenAI entities in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges that OpenAI copied their journalism to train its models, stripped identifying information from it, and now uses those models to give ChatGPT users summaries that substitute for the original reporting. The publishers seek more than USD 250 million in damages, an injunction and an order for the destruction of models and training sets containing their content.
IndiaIntellectual Property
Legitpro Law
Legitpro Law
Article

Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Amendment Rules, 2026: Enhancing Transparency And Consumer Protection In E-Commerce

The Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Amendment Rules, 2026 introduce significant compliance obligations for e-commerce platforms, particularly regarding the disclosure of Country of Origin and other product information. This article analyses the key amendments, their implications for manufacturers, importers, and online marketplaces, and the broader objectives of strengthening consumer protection in the digital marketplace.
IndiaConsumer Protection
Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorneys
Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorneys