IP News Updates: May-August 2026
Several Traditional Indian Products Receive GI Tags
Several Indian agricultural products, food items, handicrafts, textiles, and other traditional products have recently received Geographical Indication (GI) recognition, including the following:
Assam: Karbi Anglong Handloom Products, Assam Bihu Pepa (a traditional hornpipe wind instrument), Assam Bamboo Crafts (Ba Shilp), and Deuri Handloom Products.
Bihar: Nalanda Bawanbuti Saree and Fabrics and Gaya Pattharkatti Stone Craft.
Gujarat: Unjha Cumin and Unjha Fennel.
Haryana: Sirsa Kinnow (a high-quality variety of the hybrid citrus fruit).
Himachal Pradesh: Spiti Seabuckthorn aka Chharma (a wild berry), Salooni Safed Makka (a white maize variety), Chamba Metal Art, Sirmauri Loiya (a traditional woolen textile), Kinnauri Topi (cap), Sepuvadi (a classic Himachali delicacy), Kinnauri Apple and Kinnauri Jewellery.
Jharkhand: Jharkhand Dokra Art and Kuchai Silk Saree and Fabrics.
Madhya Pradesh: Seoni Jumbo Custard Apple, Indori Malwi Potato, Malvi Garadu (purple yam), Kumbhraj Coriander, Barman Ghat Brinjal, Gajariya Mango, Khargone Red Chilli, Khurasani Tamarind, Jabalpur Green Peas, Narsinghpur Jaggery, Jabalpur Water Chestnut and Noorjahan Mango.
Tripura: Tripura Sarinda (a stringed tribal musical instrument).
West Bengal: Chandannagar Jolbhora Sandesh (a traditional Bengali sweet).
Puri Jagannath Temple Files for Trademark Protection for Sacred Terms Associated With The Temple
The Shree Jagannath Temple Administration (SJTA) has filed to obtain trademark protection for five more terms associated with the Puri Jagannath Temple. The terms are “Jagannath Dham,” “Shree Kshetra,” “Mahaprasad,” “Nilachakra,” and “Koili Baikuntha.” The registrations add to the temple administration’s efforts to protect names and symbols closely associated with the temple and prevent their unauthorised commercial use. The SJTA had earlier secured trademark protection for terms including “Patitapabana” and “Ananda Bajara,” as well as the Nilachakra logo.
Zara Wins Trademark Battle Against ‘Zora’ in Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has ruled in favour of global fashion brand Zara in a trademark dispute involving the mark “ZORA,” used by a Delhi-based trader in relation to fabrics. Zara’s parent company, Inditex, challenged the registration of “ZORA,” arguing that the mark was deceptively similar to its well-known “ZARA” trademark. The Court found that the two marks were visually and phonetically similar and that their use in relation to clothing and fashion-related goods could create a likelihood of confusion among consumers. The Court therefore ordered the cancellation of the “ZORA” trademark registration.
Delhi High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Google in Hindware Trademark Dispute
Google India was recently embroiled in a trademark dispute involving Hindware’s registered trademark. The Delhi High Court refused to grant interim relief to Google in its appeal against a May 2026 judgment. The dispute concerns Google Ads, where third parties allegedly purchased “HINDWARE” and related terms as keywords to trigger advertisements for competing products when users searched for Hindware. In the May 2026 judgment, the Single Judge held Google LLC and Google India liable for trademark infringement, rejecting Google’s argument that it merely provided an advertising platform/intermediary and should not be responsible for a third party’suse of trademarks as keywords. The court directed Google LLC and Google India to jointly pay INR 30 lakh in damages and restrained the use of “HINDWARE” and its variants as advertising keywords. Google challenged the Single Judge’s decision before a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, arguing, among other things, that the use of a trademark as a backend keyword does not amount to infringement unless it results in confusion among consumers. The Division Bench declined to stay the Single Judge’s judgment at the interim stage and issued notice in Google’s appeal.
Vadilal Sues ITC Over ‘Fantastik’ Trademark
Vadilal, an Indian multinational company specializing in ice cream and frozen food products, has filed a trademark infringement suit against ITC Ltd. before a commercial court in Ahmedabad, alleging that ITC’s use of the “Fantastik” mark for chocolates and confectionery is deceptively similar to Vadilal’s long-standing “Funtastic” trademark used for ice creams. Vadilal claims that it has used the “Funtastic” mark for more than two decades and has built significant goodwill in the brand through sales across India and exports to markets including the US and Singapore. The company has sought a permanent injunction restraining ITC from using the “Fantastik” mark and is claiming INR 1 crore in damages for alleged business losses and passing off.
Nike Wins Key Battle in “Total 90” Trademark Dispute
Nike has won an important preliminary battle in a trademark dispute involving its popular “Total 90” soccer brand. Total90 LLC, an online retailer for soccer products, sued Nike after Nike revived its Total 90 products, arguing that Nike had abandoned the mark after its federal trademark registration expired in 2019. In June 2026, a U.S. District Court denied Total90’s request to stop Nike from using the mark. The court found that the expiry of Nike’s registration did not automatically mean that Nike had abandoned its trademark rights, particularly because Nike presented evidence of continued use of the Total 90 brand in commerce.
Delhi High Court Refuses Interim Injunction to ANI in Copyright Dispute Against OpenAI
The Delhi High Court has refused to grant an interim injunction sought by Asian News International (“ANI”) against OpenAI. The case concerns the use of copyrighted news content to train artificial intelligence models. ANI alleged that OpenAI used its news reports without permission to train ChatGPT and that ChatGPT had, in some instances, generated responses falsely attributed to ANI. ANI sought an order restraining OpenAI from using its copyrighted works for training its AI models. On July 24, 2026, the Delhi High Court declined to grant the interim injunction, finding that ANI had not established a case warranting such relief.
Zee Sues Nykaa Over Use of Copyrighted Songs in Instagram Reels
Zee Entertainment has sued the beauty and fashion retailer Nykaa before the Delhi High Court, alleging that Nykaa used Zee’s copyrighted songs in promotional Instagram Reels without obtaining the necessary permission. Zee claims that Nykaa used several of its songs in 12 Instagram Reels to promote its products to millions of followers. According to Zee, while it has a licensing arrangement with Meta that allows Instagram users to access its music for personal, non-commercial use, this licence does not permit brands to use the songs for commercial advertising. Zee is seeking INR 2 crore in damages for the alleged unauthorised use.
Shein Loses UK Copyright Case Against Temu Over Product Photos
Fast-fashion retailer Shein has lost a copyright lawsuit against rival Temu, a Chinese fashion retailer, before the High Court of England and Wales, after alleging that Temu had used thousands of photographs of Shein clothing products on its UK website without permission. Shein claimed that Temu used the photographs to promote copies of Shein’s products and sought to hold Temu liable for copyright infringement. The case involved 2,559 product listings, including photographs taken by Shein employees, photographs supplied by manufacturers, and images produced by agencies or freelance photographers. Justice Kelyn Bacon rejected Shein’s copyright claims, finding that for the secondary infringement claim under Section 23 of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, Temu had to know, or have reason to believe, that the photographs were infringing copies. Justice Bacon found that Temu's third-party merchants were responsible for their own product listings and photographs, and Temu could not realistically know that millions of images uploaded by merchants were infringing unless a specific infringement was brought to its attention.
German Court Rules Against AI Music Company Suno in Landmark Copyright Case
The Munich Regional Court has ruled against AI music-generation company Suno in a landmark copyright case brought by German music rights organisation GEMA. The court found that Suno infringed copyright by using musical works represented by GEMA without permission to train its AI music-generation system. The case involved six copyrighted songs, including works by well-known artists, and the court found that Suno had reproduced and processed protected musical works as part of its AI training process. Suno was ordered to stop the infringing use, disclose information about revenue connected with the infringement, and pay damages, with the amount of damages to be determined separately.
US Judge Approves Anthropic’s $1.5 Billion Copyright Settlement
A U.S. federal judge has given final approval to a $1.5 billion copyright settlement between AI company Anthropic and a class of authors and publishers whose books were used in developing Claude. The settlement covers nearly 500,000 works, with eligible rights holders expected to receive around $3,000 per work. The case arose after Anthropic was accused of downloading and storing millions of copyrighted books without permission. The settlement follows a significant ruling in which the court found that Anthropic’s use of books that it had legally obtained to train its AI model could qualify as fair use, but held that obtaining books from pirated sources and storing them in its central library was unlawful.
Peppa Pig Creators Win Copyright Case Against Wolfoo
The High Court of England and Wales has ruled in favour of the owners of the popular children’s series Peppa Pig in a copyright dispute against the Vietnamese company behind the animated series Wolfoo. The creators of Peppa Pig alleged that Wolfoo videos used copyrighted sound recordings from Peppa Pig without permission. On June 25, 2026, the Court granted summary judgment in favour of the Peppa Pig rights holders, finding compelling evidence that Wolfoo videos had copied protected audio clips. The Court rejected Wolfoo’s argument that the use of the audio was the result of an independent contractor and that the company was unaware of the copying. The Court also ordered the removal of the infringing Wolfoo videos from online platforms, including YouTube.
Godavari Biorefineries Secures European Patent for Anti-Cancer Pharmaceutical Composition
Mumbai-based Godavari Biorefineries has secured a patent from the European Patent Office for its invention titled “Pharmaceutical Composition and a Process to Prepare the Same.” The patent covers a pharmaceutical composition combining novel anti-cancer compounds with a solubilising agent, as well as the process for preparing the composition. The formulation is designed to improve the solubility and bioavailability of the active compounds, potentially enhancing their therapeutic effectiveness. It has applications in the treatment of cancers, including breast and prostate cancer, particularly through oral administration.
Novartis Wins UK Patent Battle Over Entresto
Novartis has successfully defended its patent for Entresto, an oral medicine treating heart-failure, before the High Court of England and Wales. On August 13, 2026, Justice Richard Meade rejected a challenge brought by Accord Healthcare, which sought to invalidate Novartis’ patent to enable the launch of a generic version of the drug. The court upheld the validity of Novartis’ European patent as well as its Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC), which extends protection until 2028. The court also found that Accord’s proposed generic product would infringe the SPC.
Comments