Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 JANUARY 2013

Intellectual Property & Information Technology Laws (September 2012)

Vaish Associates Advocates
Explore more from Vaish Associates Advocates

The Plaintiff (Samsung) filed a case against the defendants who were selling grey market printers of the plaintiff in the market and operating a website selling a varied range of genuine printers under the plaintiff's mark SAMSUNG at prices much lower than offered by the plaintiff.

IndiaIntellectual Property
Author LinkedIn connections

Article by Vijay Pal Dalmia, Advocate, Supreme Court of India and Delhi High Court, Partner & Head of Intellectual Property Laws Division, Vaish Associates Advocates, India

In This Issue

Latest IP Case law

PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL EXHAUSTION:

India does not follow!

  • Samsung Electronics Vs. Kapil Wadhwa

     Prior use of trademark has to be established by production of clear and cogent evidence!
  • Premier Tissues India Ltd. v. Rolia Tissues Industries and Anr.

     No objection certificate by company not having right cannot entitle Respondent to use trade mark and copyright.
  • Hahnemann Laboratory Ltd. & Ors. v. The Hahnemann India Laboratories (BN) & Ors.
  • Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd. v. Radico Khaitan Ltd.

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

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