Intellectual Property Newsletter | May 2026

The Weird & Wonderful - Bizzare IP Cases

Beerbrella: An Umbrella for Your Beverage

In what can be regarded as a novelty yet situationally useful outdoor accessory, US6637447B2 (granted October 28, 2003) describes a “Beerbrella,” a miniature umbrella designed to be attached to a beverage container. Developed by Mason Schott McMullin, Robert Platt Bell, and Mark Andrew See, the invention consists of a small umbrella structure mounted on a shaft that can be removably fixed to the top of a bottle or can. The design allows the umbrella to extend over the open mouth of the container, shielding the beverage from direct sunlight, rain, insects, and other environmental debris. Certain embodiments include pivoted mechanisms that allow the umbrella to tilt or move out of the way while drinking. Overall, the invention focuses on improving beverage protection and convenience in outdoor settings by offering a simple and portable protective solution. [Source]

Swinging Sideways? A Method Patent for Playing on Swings

In what can be considered a curious and unconventional take on recreational activity, US6368227B1 (granted April 9, 2002) describes a patented method of swinging on a sideways motion rather than the traditional forward-and-back movement. The invention outlines a specific technique involving coordinated body movements that enables a rider to generate lateral motion, thereby enhancing the overall swinging experience. The patented method focuses on altering the dynamics of motion to introduce a novel form of play, potentially increasing amusement and variation in a common playground activity. While the concept may appear simple or even playful, it illustrates how method-based inventions, when sufficiently novel and clearly defined, qualify for patent protection. Overall, the invention emphasizes the potential for innovation in everyday activities through structured and repeatable techniques. [Source]

Collar Apparatus Enabling Secure Handling of a Snake by Tether

In what can be described as a clever and practical innovation in the field of pet handling and animal restraint systems, US6490999B1 (granted on December 10, 2002) introduces a specially designed collar apparatus that allows snake owners to safely tether and walk their pet snakes. Developed by Donald Robert Martin Boys, the invention addresses the unique challenge of controlling snakes, which can easily escape traditional restraints due to their flexible bodies and distinctive concertina style movement. The system features a lightweight and adjustable key-shaped collar that wraps securely around the snake without causing discomfort, while special fastening mechanisms help keep the collar firmly in place. Certain versions also include rotating bead chain elements that reduce the snake’s ability to push itself through the collar, improving control and safety. The invention may include a tether and a hooked walking stick that enables owners to guide or retrieve the snake without direct physical handling. Made from flexible and durable materials such as canvas, nylon, or leather, the apparatus allows snakes to move more freely outdoors while remaining safely controlled, ultimately promoting safer interaction, healthier activity, and a more convenient experience for snake owners. [Source]

Legal & Regulatory Updates

India

Reddy Pharmaceuticals vs Dr. Reddy's Laboratories on 18 May, 2026

India’s trademark jurisprudence in the pharmaceutical sector was further clarified by the Delhi High Court on 18 May 2026 in Reddy Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd. (RFA(OS) 138/2013 and connected matters), where the Court resolved a protracted dispute concerning rights over the mark “REDDY.” The litigation involved competing claims of proprietorship and goodwill between Reddy Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (RPL) and Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories (DRL), with DRL alleging that RPL’s use of the mark amounted to infringement and passing off by capitalizing on DRL’s established reputation. The Court undertook a detailed assessment of prior use, acquired distinctiveness, likelihood of consumer confusion in the pharmaceutical market, and the legal implications of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board’s order removing RPL’s mark from the Trademarks Register. Affirming DRL’s superior proprietary and common law rights, the Court granted injunctive relief restraining RPL from using the impugned mark in a manner likely to mislead consumers, thereby reinforcing stricter protection of brand identity and public interest in the pharmaceutical industry. [Source]

Hanmi Pharm. Co. Ltd vs The Controller General of Patents and Design on 11 May, 2026

India’s patent adjudication framework in the pharmaceutical sector received further judicial scrutiny on 11 May 2026, when the Delhi High Court in Hanmi Pharm. Co. Ltd. v. The Controller General of Patents and Designs (C.A.(COMM.IPD‑PAT) 421/2023) addressed the standards governing inventive step and patentability under the Patents Act, 1970. The dispute arose from the rejection of a patent application concerning a cancer‑treatment pharmaceutical composition, with the Controller concluding that the claimed invention lacked inventive step under Section 2(1)(ja) and was non‑patentable under Section 3(d) as merely a new form of a known substance without enhanced therapeutic efficacy. Hanmi Pharm. contended that its formulation demonstrated improved pharmacokinetic properties, stability, and therapeutic benefits over prior art. The Court found that the Controller’s decision suffered from insufficient technical reasoning and an inadequate evaluation of the experimental evidence submitted. Setting aside the impugned order, the Court remanded the matter for fresh consideration with directions to conduct a detailed, reasoned, and comprehensive assessment of inventive step and enhanced efficacy, thereby reinforcing the need for rigorous and evidence‑based patent examination in pharmaceutical innovations. [Source]

Platform to Accelerate Patent Commercialization in Electronics and IT Sector

In May 2026, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology launched the “IP Catalyst” initiative and its digital platform, CIPIE, at a national conference in New Delhi focused on accelerating IP commercialization in the Electronics and IT sector. Developed by CDAC (Centre for Development of Advanced Computing) Pune with Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology support, the initiative is designed to help innovators, startups, MSMEs, research institutions, and industry players move inventions from the lab to the marketplace more efficiently. The platform will offer a wide range of support services including patent filing assistance, international patent support for startups, IP advisory services, technology valuation, licensing facilitation, and collaboration opportunities between academia and industry. It will also serve as a digital repository of indigenous technologies developed by Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology-supported R&D programs, making it easier for businesses to identify and adopt homegrown innovations. The initiative reflects India’s broader push to ensure that patents generate commercial and economic value while strengthening the country’s innovation ecosystem and technology self-reliance under the vision of Viksit Bharat. [Source]

Global Updates

Vietnam launches fresh crackdown on online piracy under threat of US tariffs

Vietnam's Prime Minister Le Minh Hung has directed ministries to boost detection of copyright infringement covering pirated movies, music, TV shows, online video games and counterfeit goods by at least 20% by end of May as they faced renewed U.S. pressure over intellectual property violations. The move follows the Trump administration branding Vietnam the world's worst IP offender and warning of a potential tariff investigation, after the U.S. Trade Representative classified it as the only "priority foreign country" in its annual IP report on April 30, the first such listing in 13 years. Vietnam, which recorded $153 billion in U.S.-bound shipments in 2025, said it had made significant efforts to protect intellectual property and called for an "objective and balanced assessment" by Washington. [Source]

EU countries, lawmakers clinch provisional deal on watered-down AI rules

The European Union has agreed on a diluted version of its landmark AI Act, marking a significant shift in the bloc’s approach toward regulating artificial intelligence. Following nine hours of negotiations, EU member states and European Parliament lawmakers decided to delay the implementation of rules governing high-risk AI systems including those used in biometrics, critical infrastructure, and law enforcement, until December 2027. The move comes amid growing pressure from businesses that argued the original framework imposed excessive compliance burdens and weakened Europe’s competitiveness against U.S. and Asian tech firms.

The revised agreement also exempts machinery already regulated under sector-specific laws, benefiting companies like Siemens and ASML. At the same time, lawmakers introduced stricter safeguards against harmful AI misuse, including an EU-wide ban on AI-generated non-consensual sexually explicit content and mandatory watermarking of AI-generated outputs from December 2026. [Source]

Deep Dive of the Trending Cases

India

Indian Patent Office Rejects AbbVie’s Hepatitis C Combination Therapy Patent, 19 May 2026

On 19 May 2026, the Indian Patent Office rejected AbbVie’s patent application relating to the Hepatitis C combination therapy glecaprevir/pibrentasvir, marketed internationally as Mavyret®. The rejection followed pre-grant oppositions filed by public-health groups and generic pharmaceutical stakeholders challenging the patentability of the claimed pharmaceutical composition. The Patent Office refused the application under Section 15 of the Patents Act, 1970, after observing procedural deficiencies and noting that AbbVie did not adequately respond to objections raised during opposition proceedings. The application was considered an attempt to secure secondary patent protection that could potentially extend market exclusivity beyond the original patent term. Public-health advocates welcomed the decision, emphasizing that continued rejection of weak secondary pharmaceutical patents supports affordable access to essential medicines in India. The development is particularly significant because Mavyret® remains an important global treatment for Hepatitis C, and patent rejection may facilitate future generic manufacturing opportunities within India’s pharmaceutical sector.

DLL Analysis: The decision reinforces India’s long-standing policy against pharmaceutical “evergreening” and highlights the continued effectiveness of pre-grant opposition mechanisms within the Indian patent framework. By refusing secondary protection for a known Hepatitis C therapy, the Patent Office reaffirmed the importance of balancing innovation incentives with public-health accessibility. The case demonstrates how Indian patent authorities continue to apply strict scrutiny toward pharmaceutical composition patents, especially where incremental modifications may delay generic entry. Importantly, the ruling strengthens India’s position as a global supplier of affordable medicines and may encourage further challenges against secondary pharmaceutical patents lacking demonstrable therapeutic advancement. The development also signals to multinational pharmaceutical companies that robust disclosure, procedural compliance, and strong inventive-step evidence remain critical for securing pharmaceutical patent protection in India. [Source]

Sun Pharma v. United Biotech (May 4, 2026)

The Bombay High Court on 4 May 2026 granted interim relief in favour of Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. in a trademark dispute against United Biotech Pvt. Ltd. concerning the marks “OCTRIDE” and “OTIDE”, used for drugs derived from the molecule Octreotide Acetate. The Court held that even though both parties possessed registered trademarks, a passing‑off action could still be maintained where the defendant’s registration appeared prima facie deceptive. Applying stricter standards applicable to pharmaceutical products, the Court emphasized that even a “bare possibility of confusion” is sufficient in medicinal cases due to potential public health risks. It found that the marks were phonetically similar and likely to mislead doctors, pharmacists, and patients. Accordingly, the Court restrained United Biotech from using the impugned mark and held that Sun Pharma had established a prima facie case, with the balance of convenience in its favour.

DLL Analysis: What stands out in this case is how the court steps beyond technical trademark law and focuses on the real‑world implications of confusion in the pharmaceutical sector. Unlike ordinary consumer goods, where confusion may only lead to loss of business, here the consequences could directly impact patient safety. The judgment reflects a judicial mindset where even the smallest possibility of error is treated seriously, especially in a country like India where prescriptions may be handwritten or communicated verbally. It also subtly reminds pharmaceutical companies that registration is not a complete defense, if a brand appears too close for comfort, courts are likely to step in. In practical terms, the decision pushes companies to adopt much more distinct branding strategies and reinforces the idea that public health considerations will always outweigh mere commercial interests. [Source]

Dabur India Ltd. v. Emami Ltd., Trade Dress Passing Off (May 22, 2026)

The Delhi High Court on 22 May 2026 upheld an injunction restraining Dabur India Ltd. from selling its product “Cool King Thanda Tael” on the ground that its trade dress was deceptively similar to Emami’s well‑known “Navratna Ayurvedic Oil.” The Court reaffirmed that in passing‑off actions, the overall commercial impression (trade dress) including colour scheme, bottle shape, imagery, and packaging must be considered holistically. It held that Emami had established the classic trinity of passing off: goodwill, misrepresentation, and likelihood of damage. The Court rejected Dabur’s defence that the use of a well‑known house mark would dispel confusion, noting that visual similarity outweighed brand distinction. Consequently, the Court confirmed that Dabur’s packaging constituted a deliberate imitation designed to ride on Emami’s goodwill.

DLL Analysis: What makes this decision interesting is how it shifts the focus from just the brand name to the entire way a product looks and feels to a consumer. In everyday situations, especially with health‑related products, people often rely on quick visual cues rather than reading labels carefully. The court seems to recognise this reality and treats packaging almost as a form of communication. In doing so, it sends a broader message that imitation does not always need to be exact to be problematic; even a familiar look can influence choices. For industries connected to health and wellness, this reinforces the idea that originality must extend beyond the name to every aspect of presentation, because consumers often trust what looks familiar even before they read what it is. [Source]

India's Nykaa seeks to include Meta in music copyright fight with Zee

Nykaa has asked the Delhi High Court to bring Meta into its copyright fight with Zee Entertainment, arguing that only the platform can clarify whether Nykaa's use of licensed music in Instagram reels violated any terms. The move comes after Zee sued Nykaa earlier this month for $210,000, alleging its songs were used commercially in promotional reels without proper authorisation.

The legal fault line is narrow but consequential, Zee's licensing deal with Meta permits individuals to use its music on the platform, but only for non-commercial purposes. Nykaa, a listed retailer using reels to sell products, falls squarely into contested territory. Nykaa has also pushed for mediation before any court proceedings advance.

Zee has separately sued the Reliance-Disney joint venture over similar music licensing breaches, while Reliance-Disney has countersued Zee over alleged Bollywood film licensing violation.

DLL Analysis: The central legal question in Zee v. Nykaa is not whether copyright infringement occurred on the facts, that case is relatively straightforward but rather who bears responsibility when a commercial entity uses music sourced directly from a platform's native library that the platform itself made available under a licence it holds with the rights owner. Nykaa's argument for impleading Meta is analytically sound in one narrow respect: if Meta's licensing arrangement with Zee was ambiguous as to what constitutes "commercial use," Meta cannot be entirely absolved for deploying a music library without adequately flagging those restrictions to business users. However, this argument is unlikely to succeed because Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000 grants intermediaries broad safe harbour protection and, more fundamentally, copyright law places the burden of licence compliance squarely on the user meaning Nykaa's failure to read the fine print is not a defence but a liability. The more consequential question this case raises is whether platform-facilitated access to licensed music constitutes an implied sublicence for commercial use, something Indian copyright jurisprudence has not directly addressed, and the answer will have far-reaching consequences for every brand and creator using Instagram's music library for monetised content in India. [Source]

K.K. Bansal v. Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV

On 18 May 2026, the Delhi High Court delivered a significant ruling in a long-running dispute over Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) linked to DVD player technology. The case involved Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV accusing K.K. Bansal and Rajesh Bansal of manufacturing and selling DVD players that allegedly used Philips’ patented decoding technology without authorization. Philips maintained that the patent was essential to global DVD standards, pointing out that corresponding patents in the US and Europe had already been recognized as Standard Essential Patents. The defendants, however, argued that Philips had failed to properly establish both the essentiality of the patent and actual infringement in India. They also contended that the components used in their DVD players had been purchased from authorized suppliers, and therefore Philips’ patent rights were exhausted once those components were lawfully sold. While hearing the matter, the Court closely examined the complex legal and technical issues surrounding SEP enforcement, including claim mapping, technical standard compliance, infringement analysis, and FRAND (Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) licensing obligations. The Court highlighted that disputes involving SEPs require careful technical scrutiny and strong evidence, especially when determining infringement and royalty obligations, and stressed that such findings cannot be based on assumptions or incomplete reasoning.

DLL analysis: The ruling highlights the increasing importance of robust evidentiary standards in SEP and technology patent disputes, particularly in sectors driven by global technical standards such as electronics, telecommunications, and digital systems. The judgment reinforces that patent owners cannot rely solely on foreign certifications or broad assertions of essentiality, but must clearly demonstrate how the patented technology maps onto recognized industry standards and how the accused products necessarily implement those standards. It also strengthens the importance of FRAND (Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) principles by emphasizing fairness, transparency, and proper justification in royalty calculations and licensing practices. Overall, the decision contributes to the evolution of India’s SEP jurisprudence by promoting balanced protection for innovators while preventing excessive or unsupported enforcement of standard-essential technologies. [Source]

Global

MSD v. Halozyme - PTAB Invalidates Key Biotech Delivery Patent (12 May 2026)

On 12 May 2026, the US Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision invalidating Halozyme’s US Patent No. 11,952,600 relating to modified hyaluronidase (PH20) polypeptides used in subcutaneous drug delivery technologies. The patent formed part of Halozyme’s MDASE™ platform, widely used for enabling subcutaneous administration of biologic drugs. The PTAB held that the claims failed to meet the requirements of enablement and written description under US patent law, thereby rendering all surviving claims invalid. The challenge was brought by MSD (Merck), which is currently engaged in broader litigation concerning its subcutaneous version of pembrolizumab (Keytruda SC). The invalidation of this patent significantly weakens Halozyme’s enforcement position across a cluster of related patents under active challenge.

DLL Analysis: This case highlights the increasing scrutiny of biotechnology platform patents, especially those covering broad biological mechanisms or delivery systems. Courts and tribunals are requiring clear and sufficient disclosure across the full claim scope. For innovator biotech companies, it reinforces the need for robust written description and enablement support. For competitors, it demonstrates that foundational platform patents remain vulnerable to post‑grant review challenges. [Source]

Actelion v. Mylan, Federal Circuit Confirms No Infringement in Drug Formulation Case (13 May 2026)

On 13 May 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment of the Northern District of West Virginia holding that Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.’s proposed generic version of Actelion’s hypertension drug Veletri® (epoprostenol) did not infringe Actelion’s patents (U.S. Patent Nos. 8,318,802 and 8,598,227). The dispute arose in the context of Mylan’s Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA), where Actelion alleged infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2) based on claims directed to lyophilized epoprostenol formulations requiring a bulk solution with “a pH of 13 or higher.” The central issue concerned the interpretation of the claim term “pH of 13 or higher,” specifically whether pH should be measured at actual refrigerated conditions (as argued by Actelion) or at standard temperature (25±2°C) as maintained by Mylan. On remand, the district court construed the claim narrowly to mean a pH measurement of approximately 12.98 or higher at standard temperature based on intrinsic evidence and industry practice. Applying this construction, the court found no literal infringement since Mylan’s formulation did not meet the threshold under standard conditions. The court further held that Actelion was barred from asserting infringement under the doctrine of equivalents due to prosecution history estoppel and the disclosure‑dedication rule. On appeal, the Federal Circuit affirmed the claim construction and agreed that pH values are ordinarily measured at standard temperature unless otherwise specified and upheld the findings of non‑infringement both literally and under equivalents.

DLL Analysis: This decision highlights how claim interpretation can decisively shape outcomes in pharmaceutical patent litigation. Here, the meaning of a seemingly simple parameter became the core issue, ultimately limiting the scope of protection available to the patentee. The ruling underscores that courts will rely heavily on industry standards and intrinsic evidence when construing technical terms. For innovator companies, it reinforces the need for precise drafting and clarity in defining measurement conditions within claims and specifications. For generic manufacturers, the case demonstrates viable strategies to design around patent claims by adhering to narrowly construed parameters. [Source]

Lupin v. Otsuka - Federal Circuit Upholds Non‑Infringement in Kidney Drug Dispute (21 May 2026)

On 21 May 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment of the District of Delaware holding that Lupin Ltd. and Lupin Pharmaceuticals Inc. did not infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 8,273,735 and 8,501,730 owned by Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., relating to highly pure tolvaptan and methods of synthesizing the compound used in the treatment of Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease (ADPKD). The dispute arose in the context of Lupin’s Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) seeking approval to market a generic version of Otsuka’s drug JYNARQUE®. The patents claimed processes aimed at reducing impurities in tolvaptan by limiting the quantity of a hydrogenating agent (sodium borohydride). The District Court found that Lupin’s manufacturing process, which used higher quantities of the reagent, did not fall within the claimed scope and therefore did not infringe. The court further held that certain asserted claims were invalid for obviousness. On appeal, the Federal Circuit found no clear error in the district court’s findings and affirmed both the non‑infringement ruling and the invalidity determination.

DLL Analysis: This decision reinforces how process parameters in chemical and pharmaceutical patents can play a decisive role in infringement analysis. Small variations in manufacturing steps such as reagent quantities can enable generic companies to successfully design around patented methods. For innovators, the ruling highlights the importance of drafting claims that adequately capture practical variations, while for generics, it demonstrates the effectiveness of carefully engineered non‑infringing processes in ANDA litigation. [Source]

Gilead v. Academy of Military Medical Sciences – UPC Revokes Remdesivir Use Patent (4 May 2026)

On 4 May 2026, the Milan Central Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) revoked European Patent No. EP 3854403 in its entirety, which was held by the Academy of Military Medical Sciences and covered the use of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID‑19. The patent, granted on 18 June 2025, claimed a second medical use of the antiviral compound for SARS‑CoV‑2 infections. Gilead Sciences, the original developer of remdesivir, filed a revocation action on the day of grant challenge. The UPC held that the claimed invention lacked inventive step, finding that prior scientific literature had already indicated that remdesivir was effective against related coronaviruses such as SARS and MERS, and that a skilled person would have had a reasonable expectation of success in applying it to SARS‑CoV‑2. The Court also rejected attempts by the patentee to amend the claims during proceedings. As a result, the patent was invalidated across all UPC contracting states.

DLL Analysis: This ruling is a significant development in pharmaceutical patent law in Europe, particularly for second medical use claims. The UPC’s approach emphasises that such claims must demonstrate a genuine inventive step beyond existing scientific knowledge. The decision also highlights the speed and impact of UPC proceedings, where a single ruling can invalidate patents across multiple jurisdictions. For innovators, it underscores the need for strong evidence of technical advancement, while for competitors, it demonstrates the strategic value of early revocation actions in high‑value drug markets. [Source]

Disney, James Cameron sued for allegedly misusing actor's face in 'Avatar'

Actor Q'Orianka Kilcher has filed a lawsuit in California federal court against Disney and director James Cameron, alleging that Cameron misused her likeness as the basis for Neytiri, the lead Na'vi character in the blockbuster Avatar franchise. Kilcher, who made her acting debut at 14 as Pocahontas in the 2005 film The New World, claims Cameron used a photograph of her from that film without permission as source material for Neytiri's digitally rendered facial features. Cameron has reportedly acknowledged using the image. Her attorney stated that Cameron "took the unique biometric facial features of a 14-year-old Indigenous girl" and generated billions in profit without her permission. Kilcher is invoking California's right of publicity law, which prohibits the use of a person's likeness in commerce without consent, and is seeking unspecified monetary damages. The first Avatar film remains the highest-grossing movie of all time with nearly $3 billion in revenue. Disney has not yet responded to the lawsuit.

DLL Analysis: The Kilcher v. Cameron lawsuit is analytically significant not because the facts are disputed Cameron himself publicly identified Kilcher as the source for Neytiri's design, stripping the defendants of any plausible deniability but because it forces courts to resolve a question right of publicity jurisprudence has not cleanly addressed: whether systematic biometric extraction and digital replication of a person's facial features constitutes commercial misappropriation even when the end product is a fictional animated character. The complaint goes well beyond artistic inspiration, alleging that Kilcher's likeness was replicated into production sketches, sculpted into maquettes, laser-scanned into digital models, and distributed across multiple visual effects vendors a production pipeline that resembles appropriation more than influence. An additional and explosive legal dimension is the invocation of California's deepfake statute, on the basis that a minor's likeness was used to create a character later depicted in intimate scenes. A ruling in Kilcher's favour would not merely settle a historical grievance but would establish the legal framework for protecting biometric identity at precisely the moment AI-driven production is making such extraction routine across the entire entertainment industry. [Source]

Shein accuses Temu of 'industrial scale' copyright breaches in UK legal battle

Online fast-fashion rivals Shein and Temu have taken their global legal battle to London's High Court, where a two-week trial opened on Monday. Shein alleges Temu used thousands of its photographs to advertise copies of Shein's own-brand clothing on its website, calling it copyright infringement on an industrial scale. Temu denies the allegations and counters that Shein's lawsuit is designed to secure a competitive advantage rather than legitimately enforce intellectual property rights. The High Court ruled in Temu's favour in April on 15 of 20 sample product listings after Shein dropped that part of its case. Temu has also counter-claimed for damages after an injunction forced it to remove thousands of product listings, and separately alleges Shein broke competition law by tying suppliers to exclusive agreements, a claim set for trial next year. The two companies have also sued each other in the United States. Both platforms are facing intensifying regulatory scrutiny in the EU, while the removal of a U.S. customs exemption on low-value parcels last year poses further headwinds for growth.

DLL Analysis: The legal dispute between Shein and Temu highlights the growing intersection of intellectual property enforcement and competition concerns in the fast-fashion e-commerce industry. Shein’s allegations that Temu used thousands of copyrighted product photographs to market allegedly copied designs raise significant questions regarding digital copyright infringement and the protection of commercial content on online marketplaces. At the same time, Temu’s defence and counterclaims suggest that intellectual property litigation may also be strategically used to restrict market competition, particularly where injunctions affect large-scale product listings. The parallel competition law allegations concerning exclusive supplier arrangements further indicate increasing judicial and regulatory scrutiny of dominant platform practices in the global fast-fashion sector. [Source]

Nokia SEP Dispute: UK Court Endorses Arbitration as FRAND-Compliant Path for Global Licensing Disputes

In May 2026, the England and Wales Court of Appeal delivered an important ruling in a dispute over Nokia’s Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) covering video codec technologies used in H.264/AVC and H.265/HEVC standards. Acer and ASUS approached the English courts seeking determination of FRAND (Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory) licensing terms after negotiations with Nokia failed. Nokia, however, offered an interim global license that allowed immediate access to its SEP portfolio while leaving the final licensing terms to be decided through ICC arbitration. The Court ultimately ruled that Nokia’s arbitration-based interim license offer satisfied its FRAND (Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory) obligations, emphasizing that disputes over global SEP licensing can be efficiently resolved through neutral arbitration mechanisms rather than prolonged parallel court proceedings. As a result, the Court stayed the proceedings in favors of arbitration and set aside the interim license relief granted earlier.

DLL analysis: The ruling is significant because it strengthens the role of arbitration in resolving complex global SEP and FRAND (Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory) licensing disputes. The Court recognized that neutral arbitration can be an efficient and commercially practical way to determine fair licensing terms for multinational patent portfolios. It also clarified that SEP owners can fulfil their FRAND (Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory) obligations by offering licences subject to arbitral determination of final terms, while implementers cannot reject such reasonable mechanisms and still seek more favourable court-driven outcomes. Overall, the decision reflects the growing preference for streamlined and internationally coordinated approaches to resolving technology licensing disputes. [Source]

Litigation Highlights & Practice Area

India

Aman Gupta vs John Doe/ Ashok Kumar and Ors. CS(COMM) 462/2026

Mr. Aman Gupta has filed a petition in the Delhi High Court alleging widespread and unauthorized misuse of his identity, including the creation of fake speaker booking websites, impersonation through Telegram bots, and the circulation of AI generated pornographic deepfake content. On 07.05.2026, the Delhi High Court, taking cognisance of the urgency and gravity of the matter, granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in his favour, restraining over 44 defendants from using his name, image, voice, likeness, or persona without prior authorisation. The Court further prohibited the generation, publication, and circulation of unauthorised deepfakes and other AI manipulated content associated with the petitioner.

DLL Analysis: This case marks a critical evolution in Indian jurisprudence, as the judiciary continues to expand the scope of personality rights beyond traditional celebrities to encompass modern entrepreneurs and public figures. By invoking the doctrine of personality rights and the tort of passing off, the Court has affirmed that an individual’s digital persona is a protected proprietary asset. Notably, the Court’s willingness to grant a "John Doe" (Ashok Kumar) order serves as a procedural necessity, providing a scalable mechanism to combat anonymous, cross-platform digital identity theft. Beyond mere intellectual property, this ruling signals a judicial pivot toward treating AI-driven identity exploitation such as deepfakes as a direct threat to personal dignity and commercial integrity, setting a robust precedent for the intersection of emerging technology and individual rights [Source]

Rajinder Singh vs The Registrar Of Trade Marks on 12 May, 2026

On 12.05.2026, the Delhi High Court allowed trademark proprietor Rajinder Singh to file a fresh renewal application for his “B.P.R. ” mark despite a delay of over six years. The hon’ble court held that the Trade Marks Registry could not rely on technical procedural non-compliance after having consistently sent communications to his updated address. The High Court held that the present delay of about 6.5 years was not fatal. It allowed Singh to file a fresh renewal application with the prescribed fee and penalty. The Registry was directed to process it within eight weeks.

DLL Analysis: This judgment serves as a vital check on the administrative rigidity often exhibited by the Trademark Registry. By prioritizing substantive rights over procedural technicalities, the Court has reinforced the principle that the Registry’s duty to ensure proper service of notice specifically to the address of record is a prerequisite to enforcing strict statutory deadlines. Legally, the decision signifies that "procedural non-compliance" cannot be weaponized against a proprietor when the underlying cause of that lapse is the Registry's own failure to maintain accurate records. It affirms that the courts remain a robust safeguard for rights holders to rectify administrative oversights, ensuring that long-standing commercial goodwill is not extinguished due to the Registry’s failure to adhere to its own established correspondence practices. [Source]

Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Limited vs Walter Healthcare Private Limited CS(COMM) 403/2025

On 15.05.2026, the Delhi High Court has declared GlaxoSmithKline's CALPOL a well-known trademark under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, in a suit filed against Walter Healthcare, whose WALPOL mark differed from CALPOL only in its first letter. The court found the marks deceptively similar, with five of six letters identical and both ending in "POL." The matter was settled between the parties, with the defendants agreeing to permanently discontinue the WALPOL mark and pay Rs. 2,00,000 in damages. They also agreed to withdraw their trademark application for WALPOL. The court then independently examined the well-known trademark claim, noting that CALPOL has been in continuous use since 1991, with sales exceeding Rs. 300 crores and over 20 crore pack units sold in 2024 alone. The mark holds trademark registrations in India dating back to 1965 and has been recognised as one of the UK's top 10 iconic British trademarks. The court held that CALPOL satisfied all five criteria under Section 11(6) of the Trade Marks Act for well-known trademark status.

DLL Analysis: The significant aspect of GlaxoSmithKline v. Walter Healthcare is not the infringement finding a one-letter differential between the marks made that outcome inevitable but the Court's decision to independently declare CALPOL a well-known trademark under Section 11(6) even after the parties had settled. By proceeding to that determination despite the absence of a live dispute, the Court has treated well-known trademark declarations as a matter of public interest rather than purely inter-partes relief, which represents a meaningful judicial statement about how Section 11(6) proceedings should function. The practical consequence is significant: well-known status operates erga omnes, extending CALPOL's protection across all classes and against all future claimants, transforming a bilateral dispute into a broadly applicable IP shield that no subsequent applicant can easily challenge regardless of the class they operate in. [Source]

Syngenta Participations AG v. Controller of Patents & Designs

On 4 May 2026, the Delhi High Court set aside the rejection of Syngenta Participations AG’s patent application relating to a polymorphic form of a fungicidal agrochemical compound. The Patent Office had rejected the application under Sections 2 (1) (ja) and 3(d) of the Patents Act for lack of inventive step and enhanced efficacy. Syngenta argued that the claimed polymorph offered improved thermal stability, reduced crystal formation, prevented clogging in agricultural spraying equipment, and lowered phytotoxicity risks, making it more effective for use in high-temperature conditions. The Court observed that the Patent Office failed to adequately justify its conclusions or provide supporting evidence for treating thermal stability as an inherent property of polymorphs. It further clarified that, for agrochemical inventions, efficacy should be assessed based on the practical utility and performance of the product rather than being narrowly limited to therapeutic efficacy as applied in pharmaceutical cases. Accordingly, the Court remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

DLL Analysis: The ruling strengthens India’s approach toward evaluating polymorph and agrochemical patents by emphasizing that patent rejections must be based on clear technical reasoning and supporting evidence rather than broad assumptions. The Court also clarified that, for agrochemical inventions, efficacy should be judged based on practical performance and utility, such as improved thermal stability and operational reliability, and not solely on the standards applied to pharmaceutical products. [Source]

Global Developments

European Commission Invites Stakeholder Feedback on Modernisation of EU Copyright Rules

On 13 May 2026, the European Commission launched a call for evidence seeking stakeholder feedback on the review and possible modernization of the European Union’s copyright framework, particularly the 2019 Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (DSM Directive). The initiative aims to assess whether the Directive effectively facilitated access to copyright-protected content in digital environments, improved licensing mechanisms, and promoted a fairer digital copyright marketplace. The Commission also invited views on emerging challenges posed by generative artificial intelligence, online piracy of live events, remuneration rights of performers and producers, and the use of copyrighted works for research purposes. An external study and stakeholder survey are being conducted to support the review process. The consultation, open until 25 June 2026, reflects the EU’s intention to evaluate whether targeted legislative reforms are required to address rapid technological and market developments reshaping the creative economy, digital platforms, and copyright enforcement mechanisms across member states.

DLL Analysis: The European Commission’s review signals a significant shift toward adapting copyright law to emerging technological realities, particularly generative AI and platform-driven digital content ecosystems. The reassessment of the DSM Directive reflects growing concerns regarding the adequacy of existing copyright licensing, enforcement, and remuneration frameworks in addressing AI-generated content, unauthorized online dissemination, and evolving creator rights. By specifically seeking stakeholder input on generative AI, the Commission acknowledges increasing legal uncertainty surrounding training data usage, copyright ownership, and enforcement challenges linked to synthetic media technologies. The initiative also highlights broader policy tensions between innovation, public access, creator remuneration, and digital platform accountability. Importantly, the review may influence future international copyright standards, especially concerning AI governance, fair compensation models, and cross-border digital licensing practices. The outcome of this consultation could substantially shape Europe’s regulatory approach to digital creativity, research access, and copyright enforcement in the rapidly transforming online content economy. [Source]

ERS Genomics and Aurigene Sign CRISPR/Cas9 License Agreement, 13 May 2026

On 13 May 2026, ERS Genomics entered into a non-exclusive CRISPR/Cas9 licensing agreement with Aurigene Pharmaceutical Services to expand precision genome-editing capabilities in pharmaceutical drug discovery. The agreement grants Aurigene access to ERS Genomics’ foundational CRISPR/Cas9 patent portfolio, enabling integration of gene-editing technologies into target validation, disease-model generation, and functional genomics workflows for biologics and small-molecule programs. The collaboration represents a significant development in global biotechnology intellectual property strategy, where companies increasingly rely on licensing arrangements instead of patent litigation to secure “freedom to operate” in gene-editing research. The transaction also demonstrates the growing commercial importance of foundational CRISPR patent estates controlled through licensing frameworks associated with Nobel Prize-winning CRISPR inventors. The agreement is expected to strengthen Aurigene’s contract research and manufacturing capabilities while supporting international pharmaceutical collaborations dependent upon compliant access to genome-editing intellectual property.

DLL Analysis: The agreement highlights the transition of CRISPR technology from a heavily litigated patent landscape toward structured commercial licensing ecosystems in biotechnology. By securing access to foundational CRISPR/Cas9 patents, Aurigene mitigates future infringement risks while enhancing global partner confidence in its research platforms. The deal illustrates how licensing now functions as a strategic mechanism for ensuring regulatory and commercial certainty in advanced biotech innovation. Importantly, the development reflects the increasing dominance of platform technology patents in life sciences, where ownership of enabling technologies can significantly influence downstream drug discovery markets. The agreement may encourage similar licensing models across synthetic biology, cell engineering, and biologics development sectors, reinforcing the importance of freedom-to-operate analysis in contemporary pharmaceutical research and cross-border biotechnology collaborations. [Source]

ABKCO ⁠Music & Records Inc v. Behr Paint Co, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, No. 8:25-cv-02530

Paint maker Behr has settled a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by record label ABKCO Music & Records over its use of the Rolling Stones classic "Paint It, Black" in an Instagram advertisement. The two companies informed a California federal court on Monday that they had resolved their dispute and will dismiss the case. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed. ABKCO, a New York-based label that owns the rights to the Rolling Stones' recordings from the 1960s, alleged that Behr used the song to soundtrack an Instagram post in 2022 without authorization. ABKCO said it discovered the post last year and notified Behr of the alleged infringement in August, but the company was unwilling to engage in further dialogue. ABKCO filed suit in November 2025 seeking unspecified monetary damages. Behr denied the allegations in a court filing in February 2026. "Paint It, Black," released in 1966, reached number one on the Billboard Hot 100. The settlement brings an end to the dispute without a court ruling on the merits.

DLL Analysis: This case serves as a high-profile cautionary tale regarding the "commercial use" threshold for digital media. Legally, the dispute underscores that social media platforms are not exempt from the same synchronization licensing requirements as traditional broadcast media. By choosing to settle rather than litigate through trial, the parties avoided a judicial determination on the validity of Behr’s defenses, yet the filing highlights a growing trend of aggressive enforcement by catalog owners against brands that treat viral social media content as a "free" marketing environment. Ultimately, the resolution reinforces the industry norm that any integration of copyrighted music into a brand’s promotional pipeline regardless of the platform requires an express license; failure to secure one invites costly litigation that often concludes with significant settlements or, at minimum, a mandatory removal of the infringing assets. [Source]

Global crackdown on illicit pharmaceuticals sees $15.5 million in seizures

Interpol's Operation Pangea XVIII, conducted across 90 countries and territories, has resulted in the seizure of 6.42x million doses of unapproved and counterfeit pharmaceuticals worth $15.5 million, leading to 269 arrests and the dismantling of 66 criminal groups involved in the illicit pharmaceutical trade. The most commonly seized products included erectile dysfunction medications, sedatives, analgesics, antibiotics and anti-smoking products, while digital enforcement operations disrupted approximately 5,700 criminal-linked websites, social media pages, channels and automated bots used to market and sell illicit medicines. Notably, the surge in demand for GLP-1 medicines, originally developed to treat diabetes but now widely used for weight loss, has opened new opportunities for criminal networks, with illicit versions often manufactured in Asia and sold online for as low as $10, and in some cases found to contain sibutramine, a substance banned in many countries due to links to heart attacks and strokes. In Africa, seizures differed from other regions, comprising mainly essential medicines such as painkillers, antibiotics and antimalarials sold through informal markets where healthcare access is limited, with many products found to be substandard, falsified, expired or unsafe.

DLL Analysis: Operation Pangea XVIII exposes a fundamental enforcement asymmetry seizing $15.5 million worth of illicit medicines against a global counterfeit pharmaceutical market worth hundreds of billions reveals that coordinated enforcement cannot substitute for structural regulatory reform. The GLP-1 dimension is legally telling: explosive consumer demand for weight-loss drugs has created a regulatory vacuum where legitimate supply cannot meet market demand, predictably driving consumers toward unregulated online markets a failure of pharmaceutical access policy that criminal networks are exploiting rather than creating. The Africa finding presents a distinct legal problem, where seized products are essentially essential medicines sold through informal channels in healthcare-deficient environments, raising the question of whether enforcement frameworks designed for illicit lifestyle drug markets are proportionately applicable where the underlying driver is absence of legitimate healthcare access rather than consumer recklessness. The targeting of 5,700 digital platforms further confirms that pharmaceutical enforcement is now an internet governance problem as much as a customs one, and existing platform liability frameworks remain wholly inadequate for bot-driven pharmaceutical distribution at scale. [Source]

EPO, ECLAC and IDB Highlight Intellectual Property as a Tool for Innovation and Economic Growth in Latin America

On May 19, 2026, the European Patent Office, along with the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean and supported by the Inter-American Development Bank, launched a joint study examining how intellectual property can support innovation, economic growth, and sustainable development across Latin America and the Caribbean. The study explores the opportunities and challenges involved in using patents, innovation policies, financing support, and technology commercialization to strengthen regional innovation ecosystems. By combining international patent expertise with regional economic insights, the initiative aims to encourage knowledge sharing, international cooperation, and stronger support for startups, businesses, researchers, and innovators. The study also emphasizes the importance of turning new ideas into real economic and social benefits through better collaboration, financing access, and innovation-driven strategies.

DLL Analysis: This development shows how intellectual property is increasingly being viewed as a practical tool for innovation, business growth, and economic development rather than only a system for legal protection. It also reflects a broader global trend where IP frameworks are being connected with entrepreneurship, financing, and technology commercialization to help emerging economies strengthen their innovation ecosystems. The collaboration further highlights the growing importance of international cooperation and knowledge sharing in supporting long-term technological and economic progress. [Source]

IP in the Wild - Pop Culture & Business

Microsoft “Skyblock” Dispute- Ownership of Community, Created Digital Terms (25 May 2026)

On 25 May 2026, Microsoft successfully opposed a trademark application for the term “Skyblock,” a widely recognized gameplay mode within the Minecraft ecosystem. The opposition was grounded in the argument that “Skyblock” has evolved into a generic descriptor of a particular style of gameplay survival on a minimal floating island rather than functioning as a distinctive identifier of a single commercial source. The dispute originated from the original creator’s attempt to secure exclusive rights over the term, asserting authorship and first use. However, the U.S. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), supporting Microsoft and associated marketplace developers, found that the term had been extensively adopted across servers, maps, and user-generated content platforms over time. Due to this widespread adoption, “Skyblock” had effectively lost its distinctiveness and entered common usage, making it ineligible for trademark protection. The outcome triggered significant backlash within the gaming community, where many users regarded “Skyblock” as a collectively developed concept rather than proprietary intellectual property. This reaction underscores the increasing friction between individual creators seeking legal exclusivity and digital ecosystems that thrive on collaborative innovation and shared culture

DLL Analysis: This case highlights a growing challenge for intellectual property law in the digital age how to reconcile traditional trademark principles with rapidly evolving, community-driven environments. Unlike conventional markets where brand identity is controlled by a single entity, digital ecosystems often enable ideas to spread, transform, and gain meaning through collective participation. In such cases, even where an individual may have originated a concept, widespread, decentralized use can quickly erode its distinctiveness, making exclusive ownership legally unsustainable. The Skyblock dispute therefore illustrates the concept of “genericide” occurring at an accelerated pace in online environments, while also raising broader questions about the future of ownership in spaces where creativity is increasingly shared rather than individually controlled. [Source]

Dua Lipa v. Samsung, Celebrity Image Rights & False Endorsement (11 May 2026)

On 11 May 2026, global pop artist Dua Lipa initiated legal proceedings against Samsung Electronics before a U.S. federal court, alleging unauthorized use of her copyrighted photograph on television packaging and marketing materials. The lawsuit asserts claims of copyright infringement, trademark violation, and breach of publicity rights, contending that Samsung used her image without consent to promote its products. According to the complaint, the photograph owned by Dua Lipa and taken backstage at a music festival was prominently featured on retail packaging, creating the misleading impression that she had endorsed Samsung’s televisions. The plaintiff further argued that this unauthorized use not only exploited her commercial identity but also diluted her brand value and misled consumers, with evidence cited from consumer reactions suggesting purchasing decisions influenced by her perceived association with the product. Samsung, in its response, maintained that the image was sourced through a third‑party content provider and used based on assurances that proper licensing permissions had been obtained. The company denied intentional wrongdoing, though the dispute continues to raise questions regarding corporate liability in outsourced content usage.

DLL Analysis: This dispute illustrates the growing convergence of copyright, trademark, and publicity rights in the context of celebrity branding. In modern commercial environments, the unauthorized use of a celebrity’s image extends beyond mere copyright infringement and often implicates the broader doctrine of false endorsement, particularly where such use creates an implied association with a product. The case also highlights the increasing legal risks associated with third‑party licensing arrangements, as companies may still bear responsibility for infringement despite relying on external assurances. More broadly, it reflects how celebrity identity has evolved into a standalone intellectual property asset with significant commercial value, requiring careful management and explicit authorization in all forms of commercial exploitation. [Source]

Transactional IPs

IPG Photonics Announces Global Settlement of Patent Litigation With TRUMPF

IPG Photonics is reshaping its intellectual property and commercial strategy by entering into a global agreement with TRUMPF Laser-und System Technik SE to resolve and dismiss all patent litigation worldwide between the parties. Through this settlement, both companies eliminate ongoing legal disputes relating to laser technologies, reducing litigation uncertainty and allowing greater focus on innovation, manufacturing, and market expansion in the industrial laser sector. The agreement highlights a broader industry trend toward strategic IP dispute resolution and collaborative coexistence approaches, where managing patent risk, preserving technological leadership, and strengthening operational efficiency are becoming increasingly important in advanced manufacturing and photonics markets. [Source]

Fortress Investment Group Acquires IPValue to Expand Global Patent Commercialization and IP Monetization Strategy

Fortress Investment Group is strengthening its presence in the intellectual property and asset management sector by leading an investor consortium to acquire IPValue Management Group, a globally recognized IP licensing and commercialization company. The deal gives IPValue greater financial backing to expand its patent monetization activities and scale the commercial potential of large patent portfolios, while continuing to operate independently under its current leadership. The acquisition highlights the growing interest of institutional investors in high-value intellectual property assets, as companies increasingly focus on extracting commercial value from patents, protecting technological freedom to operate, and improving returns on innovation and R&D investments across global technology markets. [Source]

Innovation Spotlight

QIAGEN - NVIDIA Partnership (AI Bioinformatics Platform Integration), 19 May 2026

On 19 May 2026, QIAGEN announced a collaboration with NVIDIA to integrate its curated biomedical data resources with NVIDIA’s BioNeMo AI platform. The partnership focuses on applying graph‑based artificial intelligence models to large-scale biological datasets, including genomic, molecular, and clinical data, to improve drug discovery workflows. The collaboration enables pharmaceutical and biotechnology researchers to more efficiently identify therapeutic targets, biomarkers, and disease pathways by combining proprietary biological knowledge bases with advanced AI computing infrastructure. Initial pilot programs are being rolled out for selected industry partners, with broader deployment expected following validation of the integrated system. [Source]

Must Read

• Halozyme Patent Invalidated in Dispute with Merck (MSD) Over Drug‑Delivery Technology [Source]
• Big Pharma M&A set for mega year as patent expiries drive deal urgency [Source]
• Major Publishers Sue Meta Over AI Training on Copyrighted Works [Source]
• Delhi High Court Rejects Philips Royalty Claim in DVD Patent Licensing Dispute [Source]

Upcoming Events

International Conference on:

• Copyright Law and Creative Industry Management (ICCL-CIM)- Nagoya, Japan- July 15, 2026. [Source]
• Intellectual Property Rights Policy, Trends, and Future Directions (ICIPRPTFD)- Calgary, Canada- July 16, 2026. [Source]
• Trademark Law, Brand Protection, and Enforcement Strategies (ICTLBPES)- Antalya, Turkey-July 18, 2026. [Source]
• Intellectual Property Education, Training, and Professional Development (ICIETPD)- Oslo, Norway- July 21, 2026. [Source]
• Intellectual Property Rights in Global Business Practices (ICIPRGBP)- Sohar, Oman- July 22, 2026. [Source]
• Intellectual Property Rights Policy, Trends, and Future Directions (ICIPRPTFD)- Mosul, Iraq- July 22, 2026. [Source]
• IP Policy, Governance, and Regulatory Compliance (ICIPGRC)- Putrajaya, Malaysia- July 22, 2026. [Source]
• Intellectual Property Education, Training, and Professional Development (ICIETPD)- Seattle, USA- July 22, 2026. [Source]
• Licensing, Commercialization, and IP Strategy Development (ICLCIPSD)- Pilar, Argentina- July 22, 2026. [Source]
• Copyright Law and Creative Industry Management (ICCL-CIM)- San Miguel, El Salvador- July 22, 2026. [Source]
• Design Rights, Industrial Designs, and Innovation Protection (ICDRIDIP)- Tunis, Tunisia- July 23, 2026. [Source]
• Licensing, Commercialization, and IP Strategy Development (ICLCIPSD)- Addis Ababa, Ethiopia- July 23, 2026. [Source]
• Intellectual Property Rights Policy, Trends, and Future Directions (ICIPRPTFD)- Yokohama, Japan- July 28, 2026. [Source]
• IP Policy, Governance, and Regulatory Compliance (ICIPGRC)- Johannesburg, South Africa- July 28, 2026. [Source]
• IP Policy, Governance, and Regulatory Compliance (ICIPGRC)- Washington DC, USA- July 29, 2026. [Source]
• Trademark Law, Brand Protection, and Enforcement Strategies (ICTLBPES)- Geneva, Switzerland- July 29, 2026. [Source]
• Copyright Law and Creative Industry Management (ICCL-CIM)- Abu Dhabi, UAE- July 29, 2026. [Source]
• Licensing, Commercialization, and IP Strategy Development (ICLCIPSD)- Skagen, Denmark- July 30, 2026.[Source]
• IP Policy, Governance, and Regulatory Compliance (ICIPGRC)- Reading, UK- July 30, 2026.[Source]
• Intellectual Property Rights in Global Business Practices (ICIPRGBP)- Crete, Greece- July 31, 2026.[Source]