TRADEMARK
BCCI SUED OVER IPL ROBOT DOG’S NAME
Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Pvt. Ltd. the publisher of Champak magazine, has filed a trademark infringement suit in the Delhi HC against the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) for naming the Indian Premier League’s (IPL) AI robot dog “Champak”. Champak Magazine argues that BCCI’s use of the word “Champak” infringes its registered trademark and constitutes an unfair commercial advantage. BCCI countered that “Champak” is a common word (a flower name) and is associated with other characters; and the robot dog’s name was based on fan votes.
The HC questioned the publisher’s claim of commercial infringement and noted the absence of specific pleadings under Section 29(4) of the Trademarks Act. Further, the HC issued notice to BCCI on the magazine’s interim injunction application, seeking a response within four weeks.
1. Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Private Limited v. Board of Control for Cricket in India & Anr. CS(COMM) 395/2025
TRADEMARK
RCB MOVES DELHI HC OVER TM DISPARAGEMENT
Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB) has filed a lawsuit in the Delhi HC against Uber India Systems Pvt. Ltd., alleging trademark disparagement. The legal action targets a recent YouTube advertisement by Uber promoting its Uber Moto bike taxi service. RCB contends that the advertisement, titled “Baddies in Bengaluru ft. Travis Head,” features Sunrisers Hyderabad (SRH) player Travis Head in a manner that disparages RCB’s registered trademark. Specifically, the ad reportedly depicts Head defacing a stadium sign from “Bengaluru vs Hyderabad” to “Royally Challenged Bengaluru,” a play on RCB’s official name.
RCB argues that this act exceeds acceptable humor and constitutes commercial mockery of their brand, especially considering Uber’s sponsorship of the rival Sunrisers Hyderabad. It further raises concerns about the use of a phrase similar to their trademarked slogan. Conversely, Uber defended the advertisement as satire, arguing it should be viewed as light-hearted banter common in sports advertising, promoting Uber Moto as a solution to Bengaluru’s traffic, on the 13th May 2025, the date of the RCB & SRH match at the Bengaluru cricket stadium.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee of the Delhi HC heard initial arguments on Thursday and noted the apparent merit in RCB’s claims. However, the court has reserved its order on RCB’s request for an interim injunction to remove the advertisement, pending further adjudication.
TRADEMARK
DELHI HC RESTRAINS ATUL GREENTECH FROM USING MOBILI
In a trademark infringement suit filed by Exxon Mobil Corporation against Atul Greentech Pvt. Ltd. (AGPL) before the Delhi HC, an ex parte ad interim order has been granted in favor of Exxon Mobil. The HC, observing the phonetic and visual similarity between Exxon Mobil’s registered mark ‘Mobil’ and AGPL’s ‘MOBILI’, and noting the potential for consumer confusion, issued the order.
The ex parte ad interim order restrains AGPL and its parent company, Atul Auto Limited, from manufacturing, advertising, and selling goods under the ‘MOBILI’ brand pending further proceedings.
COPYRIGHT
DPIIT FORM PANEL TO STUDY AI’S IMPACT ON COPYRIGHT LAW
The Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has established a multi-stakeholder committee to examine the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and copyright law in India. Chaired by Ms. Himani Pande, Additional Secretary at DPIIT, the committee will assess the adequacy of the Copyright Act, 1957, in addressing the rise of AI-generated content. The move comes amid increasing use of generative AI tools for creating various forms of creative work, often drawing from copyrighted material. India’s current legal framework lacks clarity on the treatment and ownership of such content.
The committee comprises members from the government (Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, MEITY), industry (National Association of Software and Service Companies, NASSCOM), legal fields (IP attorneys), and academia (University of Delhi). Its mandate includes identifying legal and policy issues, examining the sufficiency of the existing Act, recommending necessary changes, and publishing a working paper on its findings.
COPYRIGHT
POET AAMIR AZIZ ACCUSES ARTIST ANITA DUBE OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
Poet Aamir Aziz has publicly accused artist Anita Dube on the social media platform “X” (formerly Twitter) of copyright infringement for using lines from his popular poem, “Sab Yaad Rakha Jayega,” in her artwork without his permission, credit, or compensation. Aziz’s poem gained prominence during the 2020 anti-Citizenship Amendment Act protests.
Dube’s recent exhibition in New Delhi featured works incorporating these lines, including one titled “After Aamir Aziz.” Aziz discovered this after a friend saw his words displayed at a gallery, claiming Dube had used his poem in previous exhibitions as well. He condemned this as “theft” and “erasure,” unlike the supportive use of his poem in protests.
In response, Dube expressed sadness over the public dispute and stated she used the lines in the “spirit of Commons and Copy Left,” similar to quoting other thinkers. Dube acknowledged an “ethical lapse” in not seeking permission, having only given credit to the artist. She also apologized, offered compensation, and, after receiving a legal notice, has taken the artworks off sale, hoping for a fair resolution.
PATENT
APPLE ORDERED TO PAY $502 MILLION IN UK PATENT DISPUTE
Apple has been ordered by London’s Court of Appeal to pay a substantial $502 million (£378m) to Optis Cellular Technology, a US-based patent holding company, following an appeal in their long-standing patent dispute. The case revolves around Optis’ 4G patents, deemed “standard essential patents” (SEPs) crucial for mobile devices to connect to 4G networks.
The legal battle saw an earlier ruling in 2022 by the UK High Court, which found Apple had infringed two of Optis’ 4G SEPs. In 2023, the HC determined that Apple should pay Optis $56.43 million plus interest for past and future sales. However, Optis contested this amount, arguing it was insufficient, and proceeded with an appeal. On May 1, 2025, the Court of Appeal overturned the previous payment decision. The Court of Appeal ruled that Apple must pay Optis a significantly larger lump sum of $502 million, excluding interest. This revised amount grants Apple a global license to utilize Optis’ 4G patents in its devices for the period spanning from 2013 to 2027. The Court of Appeal’s judgment represents a considerable increase in the financial burden for Apple compared to the initial High Court ruling.
1.Optis Cellular Technology LLC and Ors. -v- Apple Retail UK Ltd and Ors; CA-2024-000695
PATENT
OURA WINS INITIAL PATENT RULING AGAINST ULTRAHUMAN & RINGCONN
Finnish healthcare company Oura has secured a favorable initial determination in its patent infringement case against competitors Ultrahuman and RingConn at the US International Trade Commission (ITC). The ruling, issued by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) on April 30, 2025, found that smart rings from both Ultrahuman and RingConn infringe on all asserted patent claims related to the Oura Ring’s design and internal components.
The ALJ’s determination also highlighted alleged “dishonest tactics” employed by Oura’s competitors, with specific mention of Ultrahuman for reportedly falsifying evidence concerning a manufacturing facility in Texas. Based on these findings, the ALJ has recommended that the ITC should issue a cease-and-desist order. If this recommendation is upheld by the full ITC in the coming months, it could result in a ban on the importation and sale of the infringing Ultrahuman and RingConn smart rings within the United States. The affected companies may also be compelled to redesign their products to avoid further patent infringement.
