Marketers bet on unified cross-media measurement for efficient ad planning
India’s advertising ecosystem is gradually moving towards unified cross-screen measurement as sports viewership continues to fragment across TV, connected TV, and mobile, said industry executives.
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting’s draft TV rating guidelines, which call for integrated measurement across linear and connected TV, have added regulatory momentum to this shift.
With sports advertising spending nearing $1 billion in 2024, marketers say visibility into unduplicated audiences across platforms is becoming increasingly crucial for planning.
JioStar’s new cross-media measurement initiative with Nielsen, based on Indian Premier League (IPL) 2025 data, reflects the broader industry effort to understand multi-screen consumption. The study analysed campaigns across five categories: carbonated beverages, consumer durables, automobiles, fintech, and FMCG, to provide a representative view of advertising behaviour.
The analysis reported an audience overlap of under 5% for ad exposures across linear TV, connected TV, and mobile, suggesting that each platform contributes incremental reach. Cross-screen plans added 20% to 40% incremental reach across categories, indicating potential efficiencies compared with platform-specific planning.
Some marketers, however, contend that overlap may be higher in practice, given that India’s sports audience increasingly consumes live sports across both TV and digital.
Centre plans tighter IT Rules to curb ‘obscene’ and harmful online content
The Centre is considering significant amendments to the Information Technology (IT) Rules, 2021, to curb what it calls the spread of “obscene” content across digital news platforms and video-on-demand services.
According to sources, the proposed definition of “obscene” content may be broad and could cover material that includes defamatory claims, “half-truths”, “anti-national attitudes”, or content that “criticises” aspects of the “social, public and moral life of the country”.
These potential changes are being examined for Part III of the IT Rules, which regulates over-the-top (OTT) platforms such as Netflix, Prime Video and Disney+ Hotstar, as well as digital news outlets. This section of the rules falls under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.
The review follows the controversy earlier this year involving Samay Raina, Ranveer Allahbadia and the show ‘India’s Got Latent’, during which the Supreme Court granted them protection from arrest but also asked the Centre if it planned to regulate “obscene” online content.
In submissions to a parliamentary panel, the information and broadcasting ministry said there was rising public worry that the constitutional right to freedom of expression “is being misused to showcase obscene and violent content on digital platforms”.
Part III of the IT Rules requires OTT platforms to operate a three-tier grievance redressal system, including self-regulation, an industry regulatory body, and government oversight. The Code also bars unlawful content, mandates age ratings and restricts access to adult content for minors.
However, the implementation of this mechanism is stalled. The Bombay High Court and the Madras High Court have stayed the provision, and the Kerala High Court has barred coercive action for non-compliance.
Around 15 petitions have challenged the rules. In 2021, the Centre moved the Supreme Court seeking to consolidate all cases to avoid conflicting judgments. The petitions have since been transferred to the Delhi High Court, where hearings are underway.
Online money games used to fund terror, govt tells SC
Justifying its decision to ban online money games by bringing Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, Centre on Tuesday told Supreme Court that the unregulated online gaming sector had links with terror financing and money laundering, but said it was premature to examine validity of the law as it had not yet been notified after President’s assent.
In an affidavit filed in court on a batch of petitions challenging validity of the law, the Centre told the court that the Act was meant to protect individuals, especially youth and vulnerable populations, from the adverse social, economic, psychological and privacy related impacts of online money games and to safeguard the integrity of financial systems and security and sovereignty of the country. The affidavit also mentioned that data pertaining to money laundering and terror financing links to online money games were classified but agreed to place the same in SC in a sealed cover.
Madras High Court Stays Single Judge Order Asking Actor Vishal To Pay ₹30 Crore To Lyca Productions
The Division bench of the Madras High Court, on 24.11.2025, stayed a single judge order directing actor Vishal to pay Rs. 30 crore due to the entertainment company Lyca Productions. The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq granted the interim relief in an appeal moved by the actor challenging the June 2025 order of the single judge.
The judges however asked the actor to deposit 10 crore towards the credit of the case and directed the registry to deposit the money into an interest-bearing account.
Vishal had taken a loan from GN Anbu Chezhian of Gopuram Films to the tune of Rs 21.29 crore along with interest. When these amounts remained unpaid, Lyca Productions stepped in and paid Anbu Chezhian on the promise that Vishal will repay Lyca the entire amount along with interest at the rate of 30% per annum, calculated on diminishing balance.
When this amount remained unpaid, Lyca approached the High Court which directed him to make a fixed deposit for ₹15 crore to the credit of the civil suit and hand over the original FD receipts to the Registrar of the High Court. This FD was initially for a period of one year and was to be renewed till the disposal of the suit. Though Vishal had challenged this order, the court had observed that there was a debt and Vishal was liable to repay Lyca.
The court noted that there was an agreement entered into between the parties which was admitted by Vishal in his counters and the same was breached. Thus, the court noted that Lyca was entitled to recover the principal amount of from Vishal. The single judge had also remarked that Vishal’s conduct had been evasive from the beginning of the suit.
When the appeal against this order was taken up, the actor, informed the bench that the he was not in a financial position to pay off the exorbitant interest claimed by the film company especially when the interest payable by the actor alone was close to Rs. 40 crore.
At this point, the court wondered if film financiers could claim such exorbitant interest. The court remarked that it had to be seen whether such a demand for exorbitant interest would be against the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act 2003. The court directed Lyca to file its counter and adjourned the case by four weeks.
CCPA fines Reliance JioMart ₹1 lakh for misleading ads to sell uncertified walkie-talkies
The central consumer protection authority (CCPA) has held JioMart, operated by Reliance Retail Ltd, accountable for misleading advertisements and unfair trade practices over the sale of walkie-talkies without mandatory regulatory disclosures. The order, follows a detailed investigation that found the platform had listed wireless communication devices without specifying whether they required a licence, their operating frequency, or their compliance status under Indian laws governing radio equipment.
CCPA initiated the case after taking note of product listings on JioMart’s official website that failed to disclose crucial information about walkie-talkies which are regulated under the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 and the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. The authority noted that low-power personal mobile radios operating between 446.0MHz–446.2MHz are exempt from licensing, but manufacturers must obtain equipment type approval (ETA) from the wireless planning and coordination wing (WPCW).
Despite these requirements, listings on JioMart did not specify frequency details or whether the devices were exempt or required licensing. The omission, the authority held, had the potential to mislead consumers into assuming unrestricted use.
After examining the DG’s findings, submissions from JioMart and relevant legal provisions, CCPA held that the omissions amounted to violations of consumer rights and misleading advertisements as defined under Section 2(28), including deliberate concealment of important information and imposed a penalty of ₹1 lakh. The authority also noted that intermediaries are responsible for ensuring that regulatory requirements are not bypassed on their platforms.
ED freezes deposits worth Rs 523 crore in probe against online gaming platforms WinZo, Gameskraft
India’s Enforcement Directorate has frozen deposits of about ₹523 crore belonging to online gaming platforms WinZO and Gameskraft as part of an ongoing money-laundering investigation, as per the news reports. The agency conducted searches in Delhi, Bengaluru and Gurugram between 18 and November 22, targeting their parent companies Nirdesa Networks, Gameskraft Technologies and WinZO Games, along with their promoters.
Officials alleged that WinZO withheld nearly ₹43 crore after the government’s August 22, 2025 ban on real-money gaming, with ₹505 crore identified as suspected proceeds of crime held across bank accounts, bonds, fixed deposits and mutual funds.
Allegations Against WinZO and Gameskraft
According to the ED, WinZO used algorithms against players without disclosure, restricted withdrawals and operated its global real-money games for markets such as Brazil, the US and Germany through a single India-hosted platform. The agency also claimed that funds were diverted overseas, including $55 million (₹489.9 crore) parked in a US account described as a shell entity.
Gameskraft was accused of similar conduct under its Pocket52 platform, allegedly retaining over ₹30 crore in escrow after the gaming ban. 8 bank accounts holding deposits of ₹18.57 crore linked to Gameskraft, Nirdesa Networks and related entities were frozen.
Investigation Scope and Financial Trail
As per the news reports, the ED stated that unauthorised bets placed and lost by users generated illicit funds through what it described as “unscrupulous” algorithmic practices. Investigators indicated that operations and account management for WinZO’s overseas business were controlled from India, while Gameskraft’s withheld funds fell under scrutiny following the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025.
The probe continues to examine financial flows, overseas investments, and platform practices across both companies.
Notably, the Directorate of Enforcement (ED), Bengaluru Zonal Office, subsequently arrested Paavan Nanda and Saumya Singh Rathore, both Directors of WinZO Games Pvt. Ltd., for their alleged involvement in money-laundering activities linked to the company’s online real-money gaming operations. The PMLA court in Bengaluru granted ED a 10-day custody of the both the directors.
HC bars Pelican from using trademark of ITC’s Gold Flake
The Delhi High Court has restrained Pelican Tobacco Co. Ltd., its directors and its properties from using the name, trade dress and labels similar to ITC Ltd.’s ‘Gold Flake’ trademark, till the main suit filed by the latter was decided. Pelican Tobacco has replicated all essential features of ITC’s marks and labels, said the high court. “The defendants’ minor variation, substituting ‘K’ with ‘M’ to form ‘Gold Flame’ from ‘Gold Flake’ does not make the competing marks dissimilar. Cigarettes are purchased by all classes of consumers and when sold loose, the consumers may not check the exact spelling before purchasing the infringing product,” said the court.
The word ‘gold’ has nothing to do with cigarettes in normal context, it is ITC which started using this word with respect to cigarettes, said the court. ITC has acquired substantial goodwill in the ‘Gold Flake’ mark and the Madras High Court in 2018 has also declared it as a well-known mark. “The use of the word ‘Gold’ has become indelibly associated with the plaintiff’s product and thereby the mark ‘Gold’ has acquired a secondary meaning within the cigarette industry,” said the court.
ITC has been using ‘Gold Flake’ as a composite mark for over a100 years and has built a reputation and a market for its products. Considering the overall similarities between ITC’s marks and Pelican Tobacco’s marks, the plaintiff is entitled to protection of its marks, the court said.
ITC has demonstrated the goodwill and reputation acquired by its marks, said the court. ITC has earned a considerable revenue of INR 401.86 billion for 2023-24 (Apr-Mar) from the sales of its products under the ‘Gold Flake’ trademark. Pelican Tobacco’s use of ‘Gold Flame’ mark is dishonest and is nothing but an attempt to ride the goodwill and reputation of ITC’s marks so as to cause confusion in the market, the court added.
The petitioner had argued that the defendants had replicated all essential features of its trademark and labels. Pelican Tobacco’s minor variation of substituting ‘K’ with ‘M’ to form ‘Gold Flame’ from ‘Gold Flake is a superficial change that does nothing to dispel confusion or deception, said ITC. Pelican Tobacco’s adoption is not innocuous but a deliberate act to ride upon the goodwill and reputation of ITC’s marks and to create an injurious association in the minds of consumers that the infringing products are related to ITC’s products, said the petitioner.
| Label of the Plaintiff
|
Label of the Defendant
|
AI Startup Suno Inks Warner Music Deal, Settling Litigation
Warner Music Group has made a deal with artificial intelligence music-generator Suno that will let the startup launch new models based on licensed songs.
The agreement settles Warner’s copyright litigation against Suno.
Suno’s platform allows users to generate songs based on text prompts. Suno will launch new models next year and require users to be paid subscribers to download songs, the companies said.
Paid users will be given a cap on monthly downloads with the option to pay for more. Warner artists and songwriters will have the choice to opt into the service, the companies said.
As part of the deal, Suno is acquiring Songkick, Warner Music’s concert-discovery platform. Financial terms were not disclosed. Suno recently announced a $250 million fundraising round at a valuation of $2.45 billion.
Warner is the first major music label company to sign a deal with Suno. Warner and the two other largest labels, Sony Music Group and Universal Music Group, sued Suno and another AI music platform, Udio, last year, alleging copyright infringement. Universal and Warner recently announced deals with Udio.
Shilpa Shetty Moves Bombay High Court For Protection Of Her Personality Rights
Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty has moved the Bombay High Court seeking protection of her personality rights from being illegally commercialised by several known and unknown platforms which are using Artificial Intelligence (AI) version of her voice, deepfake images etc and earning profits.
Shetty has highlighted that she is one of the most celebrated and internationally recognised personalities in the Indian entertainment industry for over three decades and is a global icon, considered as one of the leading actresses of the 1990s, and global ambassador for various brands.
It is further pointed out that she has earned immense fame and respect for her prolific acting career, philanthropic endeavours, and global representation of Indian culture and cinema.
In her plea, the actress has pointed out that the present proceedings concern the misuse of her personality/publicity rights.
Explaining the manner in which her personality rights are being breached, the plea points out that clips of Shetty’s movies are extracted for the purpose of creation, communication of Graphic Interchange Formats (GIFs) bearing her name, image, likeness and caricature, etc.
Further it is alleged that the use of artificial intelligence such as machine learning algorithms as well as other elements of technology to clone Shetty’s voice, vocal style and technique, vocal arrangements and interpretations, mannerisms as well as morphed images of her face and create her images on posters, diaries, publishing books.
The Defendants, by reproducing and circulating manipulated clips containing the Plaintiff’s likeness and performances in a manner that subjects her to unsavoury humour, ridicule and baseless rumors have violated her moral rights in her performances and caused serious harm to her reputation, it is alleged.
Need to pre-screen social media content- Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on 27th November, 2025 directed the information and broadcasting ministry to prepare a draft mechanism to screen user-generated content before it is uploaded on social media, citing concerns over material that can trigger unrest before it is taken down.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said, “Right to freedom of speech is very important, but a regulated right. It is not absolute like the First Amendment Rights in the US. Self-regulatory codes may not work in the case of UGC.
The bench fears that if anti-national content is uploaded on social media, it may take a day or two for the government to detect it and order its removal, during which time the material could go viral and cause damage or unrest in society.
The bench stressed that the court was not seeking to curb speech. “We are on a reasonable preventive mechanism, not to throttle but sieve content on social media prior to uploading,” the court said.
Two industry bodies representing broadcasters, OTT platforms and digital channels told the court that self-regulatory codes were sufficient. The bench questioned their effectiveness, asking, “If the self-regulatory code is working, why is such content getting posted on social media?” It added that content assessment should be handled by an autonomous body, noting, “Speaking against the govt is not an anti-national activity. That is a precious democratic right.”
The court directed the I&B ministry to draft guidelines within four weeks and then publish them to gather public feedback. Attorney General R. Venkataramani and Mehta told the court the ministry would complete the exercise within the deadline. The bench said the government should consult domain experts, jurists and media professionals while preparing the draft.
Delhi High Court directs takedown of Ajay Devgan’s obscene deepfakes
The Delhi High Court on 27th November, 2025 passed an interim order protecting the personality rights of bollywood actor Ajay Devgn.
Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora restrained the defendants from using the personality traits of the actor, including his images and other personal elements, without his consent.
The defendants are also refrained from misusing the actor’s personality traits through use of artificial intelligence and deepfake technology, as well as obscene content.
Recently, coordinate benches have passed orders protecting the personality rights of “The Art of Living” foundation founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Telugu actor Nagarjuna, Bollywood actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan and film producer Karan Johar.
Notably, Justice Arora recently protected the personality rights of journalist Sudhir Chaudhary, who had sought relief regarding the circulation of allegedly misleading and AI-generated videos against him on social media.
The judge also passed a john doe order protecting the personality rights of podcaster Raj Shamani, observing that he is a known face in India, especially in the field of content creation.
Read judgement here
Family of Late Major Mohit Sharma moves Delhi High Court against release of film ‘Dhurandhar’
A week ahead of the release of Ranveer Singh’s much-awaited film Dhurandhar, the family of Late Major Mohit Sharma (Ashoka Chakra and Sena Medal awardee) has gone to the Delhi High Court, seeking an immediate stay on the release and screening of the film. The family, in their petition, has alleged that the film heavily draws inspiration from Major Mohit Sharma’s life, undercover mission, and martyrdom without the family’s or the Indian Army’s consent.
According to the petition, several elements shown in the Dhurandhar trailer and promotional material “unmistakably mirror” Major Sharma’s military career, including counter-terrorism operations conducted in Kashmir.
Ever since the trailer was released, several media reports and online discussions have repeatedly drawn parallels between Ranveer’s character and Major Mohit Sharma.
The family alleged that neither the makers acknowledged this association, nor did they consult the family during the making of the film or afterwards.
The plea emphasized that “a martyr is not a commercial commodity” and that his life cannot be recreated “for profit, without truth, dignity, or due permission.”
The family argues that the film’s unauthorized depiction infringes upon Major Sharma’s posthumous personality rights under Article 21 of the Constitution. They further argue that it violates the family’s right to privacy, dignity, and emotional well-being.
The petitioners assert that Dhurandhar appears to portray sensitive military strategies, infiltration methods, and operational details without any indication that the filmmakers obtained clearance or script approval from the Indian Army’s Additional Directorate General of Public Information (ADGPI).
Filmmakers and government bodies are named as respondents. Those named in the petition include the Union Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Additional Directorate General of Public Information (ADGPI), director and co-producer Aditya Dhar, Jio Studios, producer Jyoti Deshpande.
The petition requests the Delhi High Court to halt the release of Dhurandhar until Major Sharma’s family is allowed to privately screen the film.
They further seek a declaration making it mandatory for filmmakers to obtain consent from the martyr’s legal heirs and the Indian Army before creating or releasing any depiction of a real-life military hero.
Madras High Court bars use of Ilaiyaraaja’s songs in movie ‘Dude’
The Madras High Court, on November 28, restrained popular production house Mythri Movie Makers from continuing to retain songs composed by Ilaiyaraaja in their latest movie ‘Dude’. The hit Tamil film featured two such songs, ‘Nooru Varusham’ from the 1990 film Panakkaran and ‘Karutha Machan’ from the 1991 film Pudhu Nellu Pudhu Naathu. According to the publication, the musician, in his civil suit, “had made out a prima facie case of his songs having been mutilated and distorted, thereby causing damage to his reputation and therefore, the balance of convenience was in favour of granting an interim injunction, as sought for by him, until further orders could be passed on the civil suit.
Mythri Movie Makers, reportedly urged the judge to grant them around seven days to comply with the interim injunction order. However, Justice Senthilkumar refused to accept the submission and expressed that no such time could be granted in the prima facie case for the grant of an injunction. The counsels representing Ilaiyaraaja added that “Mythri Movie Makers was in the habit of using the songs composed by the plaintiff in its movies without seeking the musician’s permission., The composer raised an issue about the use of his work in Ajith Kumar’s Good Bad Ugly, which the banner produced.
KPMG cloned Digi Yatra app during illegal visit to Hyderabad office: Data Evolve tells Delhi High Court
Data Evolve Solutions on 27.11.2025 told the Delhi High Court that KPMG conducted an “illegal visit” to its Hyderabad premises and cloned the Digi Yatra app, later deploying it in 28 airports despite the underlying agreement permitting use only at 4 airports. (Digi Yatra Foundation v. Data Evolve Solutions)
The allegation arose during arguments on whether additional issues should be added to the ongoing Digi Yatra ownership suit.
The submission was made before Justice Subramonium Prasad, who questioned whether any of the six new issues sought by Data Evolve actually emerged from the pleadings.
During the hearing, Data Evolve sought the inclusion of six further issues, submitting that certain factual aspects – including the KPMG visit, deployment of the application and the timeline of its development – ought to be part of the trial record. Counsel stated that the application was originally developed in 2020, prior to the signing of the minimum viable agreement (MVA) with Digi Yatra Foundation (DYF).
Justice Prasad ultimately observed that most of the proposed issues were either already covered by the issues framed on October 29 or did not arise from the plaint.
The Court granted time for DYF to file its reply to the application for additional issues and listed the matter for further hearing on December 10.
DYF has also moved a similar application for framing additional issues.
Karnataka High Court restores ‘Yezdi’ trademark to Classic Legends
The Karnataka High Court has recently allowed a series of appeals filed by Classic Legends Pvt. Ltd. and its founder, restoring their right to use the ‘Yezdi’ name and logos for motorcycles. The judgment overturns a 2022 decision that had declared the marks to be the property of Ideal Jawa, the defunct manufacturer of the original Yezdi bikes.
A Division Bench of Justice D K Singh and Justice Venkatesh Naik T held that the single judge had erred in concluding that Ideal Jawa continued to own the Yezdi trademarks, noting that the marks had lapsed many years ago and the company had taken no steps to revive or protect them. The bench highlighted that goodwill cannot survive after the business itself has ceased.
The dispute traces back to Ideal Jawa’s winding up. The company stopped manufacturing Yezdi motorcycles in 1996 and entered liquidation soon after. In 2003, all its assets were sold through a court-supervised auction, but the ‘Yezdi’ trademark was not included in the valuation or the sale notice. The trademark registrations later expired between 2007 and 2008. The Trade Marks Registry also issued notices to the Official Liquidator regarding the lapse, but no renewal applications were filed.
Classic Legends, represented through co-founder Boman R Irani, the son of Ideal Jawa’s founder, argued that the trademark had been abandoned and had fallen into the public domain. Irani had independently applied for fresh registrations beginning in 2013–2014 and later assigned exclusive usage rights to Classic Legends in 2018.
The company told the court it had spent extensively on research, development, marketing and relaunching the Yezdi motorcycle brand. It added that the Official Liquidator resurfaced only in 2015, more than a decade after the assets were sold and long after the trademark had expired, and therefore could not retrospectively claim ownership or seek cancellation of valid registrations.
The bench accepted these submissions, noting the Liquidator had never treated the ‘Yezdi’ mark as a corporate asset. With the appeals now allowed, Classic Legends is free to continue using the Yezdi name and logos for its motorcycles.
Read order here.
‘Right To Be Forgotten’: Delhi Court Directs Indian Kanoon, Media To Remove Articles On PMLA Accused After His Exoneration
In a john doe order, District Court of Patiala House Court in Delhi has recently directed legal search engine Indian Kanoon, various media outlets and Google LLC to remove articles and URLs related to a money laundering accused after his complete exoneration in the case, citing his right to be forgotten.
Principal District & Sessions Judge Anju Bajaj Chandna said that the man has a right to live with dignity and the articles published with his name cannot be allowed to perpetually remain on online platforms.
The judge said that permanence of digital information and easily accessible online records were causing potential harm to him, despite his exoneration from the case.
The defendants are ANI Media, Indian Express, The Printline Media, HT Media, Times Internet, Benett Coleman & Company Limited, NDTV, THG Publishing, Indian Kanoon, Google LLC and John Doe (unknown entities).
The judge allowed the interim injunction filed by a real estate professional, who was accused in relation to the Moser Baer money laundering case registered in 2019. He was arrested in 2023, and was discharged in 2024 on merits.
In his suit, the man sought removal of the links alleging that they were defamatory and disparaging. It was his case that the phrases used in the URLs were demeaning and that the articles continued to remain accessible and available across the world wide web at the single click from the search engine.
Granting him relief, the Court said that the articles impacted his integrity and reputation in an adverse manner. No case is pending against the plaintiff and he stands exonerated of all the charges levelled by Directorate of Enforcement, the judge noted.
The judge, as an interim measure, restrained all the defendants from publishing, re-publishing, or circulating any further content in relation to him concerning the ED case.
The defendants have further been directed to de-index, de-list, and de-reference the URLs links and content of the articles in question, till the disposal of the suit.
Delhi High Court Clears ‘SoEasy’ Trademark For Hindi Learning Platform, Calls It Suggestive and Distinctive
The Delhi High Court has overturned the Trade Marks Registrar’s refusal to register the mark “SoEasy” for a Hindi learning and testing platform, holding that the phrase is suggestive rather than descriptive and is therefore capable of trademark protection. The Court directed the Registrar to process the application for registration.
In a judgment delivered on November 24, 2025, Justice Tejas Karia ruled that “SoEasy” does not describe the qualities or characteristics of the goods covered and reaffirmed that while descriptive marks cannot be protected, suggestive trademarks are registrable under the Trade Marks Act.
The dispute arose from a 2023 application filed by Ashim Kumar Ghosh seeking registration of “SoEasy” in Class 16 for instructional and teaching material, printed matter and book-binding material. The mark was examined, accepted, and published in the Trade Marks Journal in April 2024.
However, in December 2024, the Registrar issued a notice stating that the acceptance had been made in error because the mark lacked distinctiveness. After a hearing, the Registrar refused the application in May 2025, finding “SoEasy” to be laudatory, generic, and incapable of distinguishing Ghosh’s goods from those of others.
The refusal order was challenged, arguing that the Registrar could not reopen objections that had already been cleared at the examination stage, and that “SoEasy” was an arbitrary, suggestive combination of words.
Addressing this threshold issue, the court held that Section 23(1) makes registration expressly subject to Section 19, empowering the Registrar to withdraw acceptance at any stage prior to issuance of a registration certificate. It found no procedural error in the Registrar’s decision to revisit acceptance.
Turning to distinctiveness, the court applied the test that distinguishes descriptive marks from suggestive ones and held that consumers would need “imagination, thought and perception” to connect “SoEasy” with Ghosh’s Hindi language learning platform. The mark may hint that the material or platform makes learning simple, but it does not directly describe any feature of the goods.
The court concluded that “SoEasy” is a suggestive mark, not a descriptive or generic one and therefore qualifies for trademark protection. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the Registrar’s refusal, and directed that the application proceed to registration.
Read order here.
Delhi High Court Cancels Copyright For Edible Oil Label Bearing ‘Swastik’, Says It Copies Rajani Products’ Artwork
The Delhi High Court has cancelled a copyright registration granted for an edible oil label featuring a ‘Swastik’ device, holding that the artwork was a substantial reproduction of a label long used by Rajani Products, a manufacturer and seller of edible oils. Finding that the rival work lacked originality, the Court directed that the entry be expunged from the Register of Copyright.
Delivering the judgment on November 24, 2025, Justice Tejas Karia held that the artistic work registered by a seller operating as NaturalIndia Oils and Proteins had copied the essential elements of Rajani Products’ established ‘Swastik’ label.
Rajani Products said it discovered the rival registration only when the seller filed a written statement in an earlier infringement suit over similar packaging. It then moved the High Court seeking cancellation, contending that the competing label was a slavish imitation of its artistic work, including the placement of the ‘Swastik’ device and the colour scheme.
The court noted that the seller did not file any reply despite repeated opportunities. Referring to Section 50 of the Copyright Act, it recorded that any copyright entry wrongly made or unjustifiably remaining on the register can be removed through rectification proceedings filed by an aggrieved person.
Since both parties operate in the same trade and the rival label used the same ‘Swastik’ device that forms an integral part of Rajani Products’ labels, the Court held that the company was clearly aggrieved..
After comparing the rival artistic work with Rajani Products’ registered labels, the Court found substantial similarity in the background colour scheme, the depiction and placement of the ‘Swastik’ device, and the overall layout.
Read order here.
Apple moves Delhi HC against India’s global turnover penalty rule
Apple INC has moved the Delhi High Court challenging the amendment to the Competition Act, 2002, allowing the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to impose penalties based on a company’s global turnover.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela will be hearing the matter on December 03.
Apple has challenged the 2023 amendment to Section 27(b) of the Competition Act and the 2024 Monetary Penalty Guidelines.
The impugned provision empowers the CCI to impose fines of up to 10% of the average turnover of the preceding three financial years on enterprises found guilty of abuse of dominance or anti-competitive conduct.
In its petition, Apple has said that it could potentially face a fine of up to $38 billion. The plea states that Apple’s maximum penalty exposure at the rate of 10% of its average global turnover derived from all of its services globally for three fiscal years to 2024 could be around $38 billion.
It has argued that imposition of such a penalty based on global turnover. would be manifestly arbitrary, unconstitutional, grossly disproportionate and unjust.
It has been submitted that CCI should only impose a penalty based on the Indian revenue of the specific unit which violates the Competition Commission Act.
