Interim relief in commercial litigation, especially in the Indian Context, plays a very vital role in ensuring that justice delayed, does not in fact result in justice denied.

Well done! You've successfully managed level 1 (if not, it would be best that you cross level 1 before proceeding further) and now know how to navigate the choppy waters of gambling law(s) when sailing in a ship full of loot boxes.

In the first two posts in this series, we addressed Copyright concerns raised by Generative AI, primarily at the stage of training the LLM as well as using certain datasets.

Over the past few years loot boxes have attracted heightened interest amongst regulatory authorities for their alleged potentially addictive qualities or their misuse as novel instruments of money laundering. Loot boxes are not yet regulated in India.

The scope of copyright liability of Generative AI (‘genAI') models is a hot topic globally. Copyright issues that stem out of genAI technology can be categorized into four heads.

Ordinarily, in Indian Patent Litigation, a Patentee is either entitled to seek interim injunction or at the very least interim deposits to be made in its favour in lieu of an interim injunction...

Courts lately have been passing a slew of ex-parte ad interim orders against Generative Artificial Intelligence (‘gen AI') models for training their models using the voices of celebrities, and for producing output that reciprocates the celebrity's voice.

Gold Savings Schemes are schemes generally offered by the jewellery shops allowing the consumer to purchase gold by making monthly payments not exceeding 11-12 months.

SEP jurisprudence, evolving across multiple jurisdictions, consistently underscores the paramount importance of "Fairness" in all dealings ensuing in a FRAND negotiation.

In the recent years, it is the Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) and startups that are leading an innovation-based economy in India. These businesses drive the vision of ‘Make in India', creating employment and fostering economic growth.

In its judgment dated 07 February 2024, a Division Bench ruled on the interpretation and scope of product-by-process claims, holding that,