India: Intellectual Property

Many multinational groups now run a good part of their research and development from a global capability centre (GCC) in India. The engineering work gets done, the product gets built, and then a simple question comes up that nobody had planned for: who actually owns the intellectual property (IP)? In my experience advising on such structures, this question is usually asked late, often during a funding round, an audit or a dispute. By then, fixing the paper trail is expensive.

Generative AI can now reproduce a person's face, voice and mannerisms with a fidelity that the average viewer cannot tell apart from reality. What began as novelty content—face-swapped videos, synthetic voice clips circulated for entertainment—has, since 2023, become a live commercial and reputational threat.

Discovering that someone has copied your photograph, article, video, artwork, music or other original work and published it without permission can raise an immediate question: what is copyright violation, and what can you actually do about it?

Any business that uses copyrighted music in India, whether in a mobile application, digital platform, live event, broadcast, or commercial production, must obtain authorisation from the relevant copyright holders. In India, there are two primary routes through which this authorisation can be obtained: (i) a direct licence negotiated with and granted by the rights holder (or its authorised representative), or (ii) a licence obtained through a registered copyright society that administers the rights of multiple owners on a collective basis.

The article discusses the role of GCCs as an indirect investment channel into the innovation ecosystem. Observing that GCCs have become strategic innovation hubs that identify, engage, validate, and scale emerging technologies developed by Indian startups before a formal investment relationship is established, the author discusses the Key legal and regulatory considerations.

Intellectual property portfolios can be destroyed not by litigation or competition, but by a single missed renewal deadline. A patent that survived years of prosecution or a trademark built over decades can vanish because an annuity payment went unpaid on a date nobody was watching. This examination reveals how these administrative failures occur under Indian statute, why restoration is far weaker than most proprietors assume, and what a defensible renewal framework looks like in practice.

In Conqueror Innovations Private Limited & Anr. vs. Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited, FAO(OS) (COMM) 147/2025, the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court upheld the refusal of interim injunction against Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited for alleged infringement of Indian Patent No. 244963, titled “A Communication Device Finder System”.

Many multinational groups now run a good part of their research and development from a global capability centre (GCC) in India. The engineering work gets done, the product gets built, and then a simple question comes up that nobody had planned for: who actually owns the intellectual property (IP)? In my experience advising on such structures, this question is usually asked late, often during a funding round, an audit or a dispute. By then, fixing the paper trail is expensive.

The Patents Act, 1970 provides multiple mechanisms for challenging the grant or validity of a patent in India. Two important statutory mechanisms are pre-grant opposition under Section 25(1) and post-grant opposition under Section 25(2). While both mechanisms allow third parties to challenge a patent on substantially similar grounds, they operate at different stages of the patent lifecycle and differ significantly in terms of standing, procedure, timelines, fees and strategic consequences.

India’s semiconductor ecosystem is expanding across chip design, fabrication, packaging, testing and related technology services. As semiconductor companies build increasingly valuable portfolios of chip designs, manufacturing processes and proprietary know-how, semiconductor intellectual property protection in India is becoming an important component of technology and commercial strategy.

В Индии отсутствует единое правило; принадлежность прав определяется отдельно в зависимости от категории интеллектуальной собственности.

India remains one of the major economies without a dedicated trade secrets statute. Unlike the United States, which has the Defend Trade Secrets Act, or the European Union, which has a dedicated Trade Secrets Directive, India does not have a standalone legislation prescribing a statutory definition of trade secrets, a specific civil cause of action for misappropriation, or a dedicated statutory framework for remedies in trade secret disputes.