INDIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Mohit Goel, Sidhant Goel, Deepankar Mishra and Mehr Bajaj, Sim and San, Attorneys at Law
India’s IP Reset: Why Global Brands, Platforms and Investors Are Looking at India Differently A spiritual leader discovers AI-generated videos circu- lating online in which he appears to deliver sermons he never gave, endorse products he never approved and speak in a cloned version of his own voice. Fol- lowers believe the videos are authentic. At almost the same time, a consumer searching online for a luxury fashion product is shown coun- terfeit goods through sponsored marketplace listings carefully designed to resemble genuine products. The infringement is no longer hidden in obscure corners of the internet. It appears directly inside mainstream e-commerce ecosystems, amplified through platform visibility tools and algorithmic promotion systems that consumers instinctively trust. Elsewhere, a pharmaceutical therapy that once remained financially inaccessible to large sections of the population suddenly becomes dramatically cheaper after generic competition intensifies, reignit- ing debates around patent exclusivity, affordability and access to healthcare. None of these developments fit neatly within the tradi- tional image of intellectual property law. However, they increasingly define the reality of IP enforcement and commercial protection in India today. Taken together, these developments reflect something larger: India’s intellectual property ecosystem is no longer dealing merely with traditional infringement disputes – it is increasingly confronting the same platform, AI, inter- mediary liability and digital enforcement challenges reshaping global commerce itself. It is precisely this shift that makes India’s current IP moment commercially significant for global brands, technology platforms and investors. Filing rights at the speed of digital business One of the clearest indicators of India’s changing IP environment is the transformation taking place within prosecution and filing systems themselves. Historically, businesses approached trade mark fil- ing in India with modest expectations regarding timelines. Delays, procedural opacity and prolonged
examination periods were often treated as unavoid- able aspects of the system. While backlog concerns continue to exist, particularly in oppositions and con- tested proceedings, the filing ecosystem itself has evolved significantly over the past several years. Digitisation has fundamentally altered prosecution practice. Automated notices, online filings, digital queue systems and virtual hearings before the Trade Marks Office (TMO) have improved accessibility and reduced procedural friction. Weekly stakeholder open houses conducted over Webex and increasing engagement between the TMO and practitioners have also created a more responsive administrative envi- ronment than existed previously. Alongside these procedural reforms, the Intellectual Property Office has also introduced the Boudhik Sam- pada Samadhan pilot mediation initiative, signalling a wider institutional shift toward faster and commer- cially efficient IP dispute resolution. At the same time, the TMO has significantly increased the number of hearing officers and examiners, in an effort to address pendency and backlog concerns. Automated reminders and tighter procedural time- lines have materially altered prosecution behaviour. Non-adherence to procedural requirements increas- ingly results in swift abandonment orders, reflecting a broader administrative push toward efficiency and docket management. More importantly, expedited examination has become commercially meaningful. For founders launching direct-to-consumer brands, fintech platforms, gam- ing applications and AI-driven businesses, IP filings increasingly happen alongside funding rounds, app- store onboarding, advertising campaigns and market- place integration. Intellectual property protection is no longer viewed as something to be addressed after commercial success arrives; increasingly, it forms part of the infrastructure necessary to scale the business itself. Technology is also reshaping examination practice itself, particularly in relation to device marks and visu- ally driven applications. Historically, similarity assess- ment for logos and device marks often depended upon
130 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook