This Week in IP

Image credits: via Magnific

Drafting credit: Divya Telang, Research Associate

Weekly IPR Update | 01 June 2026 – 07 June 2026

Indian App Developer Defeated a ₹2 Crore Copyright Suit

The Bengaluru Commercial Court dismissed a ₹2 crore copyright infringement suit filed by Chicago-based non-profit Pathways Foundation against Indian app developer Arpit Roy, ruling that the plaintiff failed to prove ongoing infringement.1 Pathways Foundation alleged that Roy copied paediatric development modules, videos, and text resources from its “Baby Milestones App” into his own iOS applications. However, the court found no satisfactory evidence of continuing infringement, noting that Roy’s apps merely embedded YouTube URLs rather than hosting videos directly, and that Apple had already removed both of the disputed applications by June 2024. Furthermore, the court determined that the overlapping text elements were generic and of common usage rather than unique to the plaintiff, while also rejecting the claim for punitive damages because no primary entitlement to general damages was established. Consequently, the court rejected the foundation’s claims and dismissed the suit with costs.2 Read more here.

Guarding the Brand: Supreme Court Orders Telangana Colleges to Explicitly Disclaim US ‘Princeton’ Ties

The Supreme Court of India imposed stringent disclosure safeguards on six Telangana colleges operating under the “Princeton” name, ordering them to prominently declare they have no affiliation with the US Ivy League institution to prevent students from being misled.3 While disposing of petitions stemming from a 2022 trademark dispute between the Trustees of Princeton University and the Vagdevi Educational Society, the apex court left undisturbed a September 2025 Delhi High Court order that allowed the existing 30-year-old colleges to continue operating but barred the society from opening new institutions under the mark. To actively protect consumer interest, the Supreme Court mandated that the colleges feature a prominent disclaimer in the largest font size on their websites, print it on all prospectuses, admission materials, and final certificates, erect clear disclaimer boards outside their campuses, and run consecutive quarter-page public notices.4 Read more here.

Delhi HC Grants Zee Real-Time Blocking Order for FIFA World Cup 2026

The Delhi High Court issued a temporary dynamic injunction protecting Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd.’s exclusive broadcasting rights for the FIFA World Cup 2026 against unauthorized digital piracy. Recognizing that rogue operators routinely leverage advanced technologies to instantly generate alphanumeric mirrors, redirect URLs, and illicit mobile applications to evade legal orders, the court authorized a real-time blocking mechanism targeting five named pirated platforms and any emerging variants. The court directed domain registrars to lock infringing domains and hand over registrant metrics to Zee, while mandating that internet service providers disable access to subsequent pirate web spaces immediately upon notification. Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the Department of Telecommunications were ordered to oversee compliance.5

Odisha Innovation Surge: State Universities Cross 1,000 Patent Filings

Odisha’s higher education ecosystem recorded a major commercial R&D milestone, with patent filings jumping from 300 to 1,155 and research publications rising 33% over the past two years. Driven by 22 active Centres of Excellence and 75 strategic MoUs, this academic surge has translated into direct market impact, highlighted by Ravenshaw University’s successful transfer of an anti-diabetic drug technology into active industrial production. It was supported by state funding and patent assistance under the Mukhyamantri Research and Innovation Programme.6

Delhi HC Shuts Down Fake ‘GOLDIEE’ Investment Platform

The Delhi High Court has issued an ex parte ad interim injunction against a rogue website running a phishing and investment scam by misusing the well-known ‘GOLDIEE’ spice brand trademark.7 The fraudulent platform leveraged Goldiee’s official logos, mascot, and artwork to mislead the public into deceptive registration and daily income schemes. Justice Saurabh Banerjee ordered a strict 72-hour window for a complete website takedown, directing registrar Dynadot and host Cloudflare to suspend services and preserve all KYC, server, and transaction logs. Additionally, the court ordered MeitY and the Department of Telecommunications to enforce compliance.8 Read more here.

SC Frees ₹40Cr ELITO Battery Inventory

The Supreme Court of India partially modified a Calcutta High Court injunction against Amara Raja Energy and Mobility Ltd, permitting the clearance of approximately ₹40 crore worth of ELITO-branded automotive batteries already held by independent supply chain partners. Acknowledging that these units had left Amara Raja’s custody via principal-to-principal sales prior to the trade dress freeze, the court authorized their commercial release to protect third-party interests. However, passing-off battle with Exide Industries over its distinctive red branding, directing the destruction of 1,44,547 empty red cartons and mandating that Amara Raja repackage its own leftover factory inventory of 20,789 batteries into non-infringing, non-red colours before market distribution is ongoing.9

Procedural Blunders Sink Burberry’s Trademark Case Against Gaffar Market Traders

Delhi district court dismissed luxury house Burberry’s trademark lawsuit against three market traders due to critical procedural and evidentiary failures.10 The court ruled that Burberry filed the suit through an attorney whose authorization had already expired, while its seizure inventories failed to document or describe the allegedly infringing marks on most of the confiscated goods. Reaffirming that trademark registration alone does not excuse a brand from proving specific individual infringement, the court rejected claims against three defendants, though it awarded a permanent injunction and ₹3 lakh in damages against a single non-contesting trader whose inventory explicitly featured the counterfeit “Burberry” label.11

International Updates

Brand or Decoration? Chrome Hearts Hits Nordstrom with Cross-Motif Trademark Suit

Luxury brand Chrome Hearts filed a lawsuit against retail giant Nordstrom in a California federal court,12 alleging trademark infringement, counterfeiting, false designation of origin, and unfair competition over the sale of belts and jewellery featuring cross-shaped motifs. The complaint, claims Nordstrom’s products copy specific federally registered designs, the CH Cross and CH Plus, which Chrome Hearts asserts have acquired distinct source-identifying capabilities through decades of commercial use, extensive advertising, and celebrity adoption. The dispute relates to determine whether a design feature serves purely as decorative ornamentation or functions as a protectable trademark that identifies brand origin.13

$25M World Cup Whitewash: Renowned Artist Sues FIFA Over Destroyed Dallas Landmark

Artist Robert Wyland filed a lawsuit14 seeking at least $25 million in damages against international soccer governing body FIFA and building owner Slate Asset Management after his iconic 1999 downtown Dallas mural, “Ocean Life”, was painted over in preparation for the upcoming World Cup. The suit alleges that the unnotified destruction of the civic landmark violates the Visual Artists Rights Act, a U.S. law protecting artists from having their works defaced or destroyed. FIFA has disclaimed all responsibility, redirecting inquiries to the local host city committee.15

Upcycled Luxury Blocked: Paris Court Rules Authentic Chanel Buttons Can’t Legally Become Jewellery

The Paris Judicial Court handed Chanel a decisive victory against French upcycler Kamad Reworked, ruling that transforming genuine branded buttons and charms into new jewellery items constitutes trademark infringement. The court rejected the defendant’s trademark exhaustion defence, determining that altering individual accessory components into entirely new pieces represents a fundamental modification that strips away legal protection. Furthermore, the bench found that Kamad’s custom “certificates of authenticity” and online disclaimers actually worsened consumer confusion by leveraging the prestige of the interlocking “CC” monogram. Reinforcing European trademark protections against unauthorized derivative exploitation, the court ordered Kamad to disclose its sales data and awarded Chanel a provisional €75,000 payment.16

9-0 Supreme Court Victory for Generics: “Skinny Labels” Dodges a Major Patent Threat

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favour of generic manufacturer Hikma, deciding that its generic version of Amarin Pharma’s cardiovascular medication, Vascepa, did not infringe on Amarin’s patents. Overturning an appellate court decision, the Supreme Court stated that Amarin failed to prove Hikma actively induced patent infringement, showing nothing more than a “sheer possibility” that its marketing materials encouraged doctors to prescribe the drug for unapproved, patented uses. The landmark ruling strongly validates the pharmaceutical industry’s “skinny label” pathway (a regulatory mechanism allowing low-cost generics to enter the market early by omitting still-patented medical uses from their packaging) with the court refusing to penalize generic drugmakers for simply adhering to legal requirements and standard market terminology.17

Labels Pocket AI Cash? Musicians’ Union Sues WMG and UMG Over Training Deals

The American Federation of Musicians (“AFM”) has launched a federal lawsuit18 in Manhattan against Warner Music Group and Universal Music Group, claiming the labels breached their labour agreement by letting technology firms use members’ recordings for AI training without consent. The dispute centers on the labels’ recent copyright settlements and licensing arrangements with AI music generators Suno and Udio, which the union argues created fresh corporate revenue streams while leaving the actual instrumentalists uncompensated. Seeking unspecified monetary damages, the AFM asserts that the major labels permitted these tech platforms to utilize human recordings to train systems that generate derivative audio tracks. Universal Music Group defended its practices, countering that it remains a leader in establishing compensated, responsible AI agreements, while noting that the union chose to litigate during active collective bargaining negotiations that the label intends to resolve.19

  1. Pathways Foundation v. Arpit Roy, Com.OS.No.40/2025. ↩︎
  2. Riya Rathore, Bengaluru Court Dismisses US Non-Profit Pathways Foundation’s ₹2 Crore Copyright Suit Against App Developer, LiveLaw Biz (June 9, 2026), https://www.livelawbiz.com/copyright/bengaluru-court-dismisses-us-based-pathways-foundation-rs-2-crore-copyright-suit-against-indian-app-developer-537281. ↩︎
  3. The Trustees of Princeton University v. The Vagdevi Educational Society & Ors., Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 35616/2025. ↩︎
  4. Riya Rathore, Supreme Court Directs Princeton-Named Telangana Colleges To Publish Disclaimer Stating No Connection With US University, LiveLaw Biz (June 2, 2026), https://www.livelawbiz.com/trademark/supreme-court-directs-princeton-named-telangana-colleges-to-publish-disclaimer-stating-no-connection-with-us-university-536596. ↩︎
  5. Bhavini Srivastava, Delhi High Court protects Zee Entertainment’s broadcasting rights over FIFA World Cup 2026, Bar and Bench (June 4, 2026), https://www.barandbench.com/news/delhi-high-court-protects-zee-entertainments-broadcasting-rights-over-fifa-world-cup-2026. ↩︎
  6. Diana Sahu, State universities’ patent filings jump from 300 to over 1000, 33% rise in publications in 2 years, Times of India (June 1, 2026), https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bhubaneswar/state-universities-patent-filings-jump-from-300-to-over-1000-33-rise-in-publications-in-2-years/articleshow/131448697.cms. ↩︎
  7. Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt. Ltd. v. Ashok Kumar & Ors., CS(COMM) 656/2026. ↩︎
  8. Riya Rathore, Delhi High Court Orders Takedown of Rogue Website Misusing ‘GOLDIEE’ Trademark in Investment Scam, LiveLaw Biz (June 5, 2026), https://www.livelawbiz.com/trademark/delhi-high-court-orders-takedown-of-fraudulent-website-impersonating-goldiee-masala-brand-536933. ↩︎
  9. Kirit Singhania, Supreme Court Permits Sale Of ₹40 Crore ELITO Battery Inventory, Partly Modifies Exide Trade Dress Injunction, LiveLaw Biz (June 5, 2026), https://www.livelawbiz.com/top-stories/supreme-court-permits-sale-of-40-crore-elito-battery-inventory-partly-modifies-exide-trade-dress-injunction-537290. ↩︎
  10. Burberry Limited v. Krishan Kumar & Ors., CS (COMM) 332/19. ↩︎
  11. Riya Rathore, Delhi Court Dismisses Burberry Trademark Suit Against Three Gaffar Market Traders, Grants Relief Against One,LiveLaw Biz (June 6, 2026), https://www.livelawbiz.com/trademark/delhi-court-dismisses-burberry-trademark-infringement-suit-against-karol-bagh-traders-over-procedural-failures-537049. ↩︎
  12. Chrome Hearts LLC v. Nordstrom, Inc., 2:26-cv-06078 (C.D. Cal.). ↩︎
  13. Chrome Hearts v. Nordstrom: When Does Decoration Become a Brand? TFL (June 8, 2026), https://www.thefashionlaw.com/chrome-hearts-v-nordstrom-when-does-decoration-become-a-brand/. ↩︎
  14. ​Wyland v. Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), U.S. ​District Court for the Northern District of Texas, No. 3:26-cv-01794. ↩︎
  15. Blake Brittain, Artist sues FIFA for painting over Dallas ocean mural, Reuters (June 2, 2026), https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/artist-sues-fifa-painting-over-dallas-ocean-mural-2026-06-02/. ↩︎
  16. Chanel Secures Win in Case Testing the Limits of Luxury “Upcycling”, TFL (June 2, 2026), https://www.thefashionlaw.com/chanel-secures-win-in-case-testing-the-limits-of-luxury-upcycling/. ↩︎
  17. Blake Brittain, US Supreme Court backs generic drugmaker in ‘skinny label’ patent case, Reuters (June 4, 2026), https://www.reuters.com/world/us-supreme-court-backs-generic-drugmaker-skinny-label-patent-case-2026-06-04/. ↩︎
  18. American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada v. Warner Music Group Corp, U.S. District Court for the ⁠Southern District ​of New York, No. 1:26-cv-04760. ↩︎
  19. Blake Brittain, Musicians union sues record labels over AI licensing, Reuters (June 6, 2026), https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/musicians-union-sues-record-labels-over-ai-licensing-2026-06-05/. ↩︎

Tags

What do you think?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles