Search Publications

[1] For example, Amnesty International launched a structured initiative on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights in 2017, while the New York-based Data & Society Research Institute hosted a workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights in April, 2018. See Sherif Elsayed-Ali, “Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Human Rights,” Nov. 19, 2023. https://medium.com/amnesty-insights/artificial-intelligence-and-the-future-of-human-rights-b58996964df5.  Mark Latonero, “Artificial Intelligence & Human Rights: A Workshop at Data & Society.” Dec 11, 2023. https://points.datasociety.net/artificial-intelligence-human-rights-a-workshop-at-data-society-fd6358d72149.

[2] Toronto Declaration on Protecting the Rights to Equality and Non-Discrimination in Machine Learning Systems, Nov. 12, 2023. https://www. accessnow.org/cms/assets/uploads/2018/05/Toronto-Declaration-D0V2.pdf. 

[3] Digital Inclusion Lab, Global Affairs Canada, “Artificial Intelligence: Human Rights & Foreign Policy Implications.” Accessed Nov. 14, 2023. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fhIJYznWSI7oD3TVJ5CgLgHJMJ2H0uEZiQ9a_qKbLG0/edit (“GAC Strategy Paper”).

[4] The “International Bill of Rights” is a term to describe the three most important international human rights instruments, namely the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”), and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (“ICESCR”).

[5] National Science and Technology Council: Committee on Technology, “Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence,” Government Report (Washington, D.C.: Executive Office of the President, October 2016).

[6] Nello Cristianini, “On the Current Paradigm in Artificial Intelligence,” AI Communications 27, no. 1 (January 1, 2024): 37–43, https://doi.org/10.3233/AIC-130582.   

[7] Gheorghe Tecuci, “Artificial Intelligence,” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics 4, no. 2 (2012): 168–80, https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.200. 

[8] Adam Conner-Simons, “Fooling Neural Networks w/3D-Printed Objects,” MIT Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence Lab (blog), November 28, 2023, https://www.csail.mit.edu/news/fooling-neural-networks-w3d-pri

[9] What are human rights, United nations, (December 2, 2024), What are human rights? | OHCHR

[10] Universal Declaration of Human Rights (10 Dec. 1948), U.N.G.A. Res. 217 A (III) (1948) [hereinafter “UDHR”]

[11] International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (New York, 16 Dec. 1966) 993 U.N.T.S. 3, entered into force 3 Jan. 1976, art. 2(1) [hereinafter “ICESCR”].

[12] international Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (New York, 16 Dec. 1966) 999 U.N.T.S. 171 and 1057 U.N.T.S. 407, entered into force 23 Mar. 1976, art. 2 [hereinafter “ICCPR”].

[13] Guiding Principles, Principle 11.

[14] ibid., Principle 13.

[15] Millicent H. Abel and Heather Watters, “Attributions of Guilt and Punishment as Functions of Physical Attractiveness and Smiling,” The Journal of Social Psychology 145, no. 6 (December 2005): 687–702, https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.145.6.687-703;  Shai Danziger, Jonathan Levav, and Liora Avnaim-Pesso, “Extraneous Factors in Judicial Decisions,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 108, no. 17 (April 26, 2011): 6889–92, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1018033108.

[16] Thomas H. Cohen, “Automating Risk Assessment Instruments and Reliability: Examining an Important but Neglected Area in Risk Assessment Research,” Criminology & Public Policy 16, no. 1 (January 1, 2024): 271–79, https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12272.5 

[17] The Minnesota Screening Tool Assessing Recidivism Risk 2.0 (“MnSTARR 2.0”) under development by the government of the U.S. State of Minnesota is a leading example of a fully-automated risk assessment tool in the criminal justice context. Kenneth C. Land, “Automating Recidivism Risk Assessment: Should We Stay or Should We Go?,” Criminology & Public Policy 16, no. 1 (January 1, 2024): 231–33, https://doi.org/10.1111/1745- 9133.12271.

[18] According to Barocas and Selbst, one source of bias is inaccuracies in the selected features. Additional features should, in theory, allow for more accurate generalizations to be developed. Barocas and Selbst, “Big Data’s Disparate Impact.”

[19] UDHR art. 2.

[20] This assumption has been questioned. Julia Dressel and Hany Farid, “The Accuracy, Fairness, and Limits of Predicting Recidivism,” Science Advances 4, no. 1 (January 1, 2018), https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao5580.

[21] UDHR art. 3.

[22] UDHR art. 10.

[23] UDHR art. 11(1). Relatedly, the right of criminal convicts under ICCPR art. 14(5) is similarly impacted.

[24] In this vein, New York University’s AI Now Institute has developed a framework for public-sector entities in the United States to use in carrying out “algorithmic impact assessments” prior to purchasing or deploying automated decision systems. Dillon Reisman et al., “Algorithmic Impact Assessments: A Practical Framework for Public Agency Accountability” (New York University AI Now Institute, April 2018), https://ainowinstitute.org/aiareport2018.pdf. 

[25] For example, the eleven member companies of the Global Network Initiative (“GNI”), which include some of the biggest players in the AI space, commit to “carry out human rights due diligence to identify, prevent, evaluate, mitigate and account for risks to the freedom of expression and privacy rights that are implicated by the company’s products, services, activities and operations.” GNI member companies are independently assessed every two years to evaluate their compliance with this and other commitments. “Implementation Guidelines” (Global Network Initiative), accessed June 21, 2018, https://globalnetworkinitiative.org/implementation-guidelines/.

[1] Ananyaa Raghuvanshi, LLM(IP), Amity University Noida.

[2] Oxford definition celebrity

[3] Copyright Act (1957), s. 2 (qq).

[4] Copyright Act (1957), s. 2 (qq).

[5] Copyright Act (1957), s. 2 (qq).

[6] White v. Samsung Elec Am Inc, 971 F.2d 1395, 1397 (9th Cir 1992), cert denied, 113 S. Ct. 2443 (1993).

[7] Morgan Piers, The power of celebrity, http://www.arabianbusiness.com/the-power-of-celebrity122473.html (23 January 2010). (Last Visited on October 6,2023).

[8]  Martin Luther King Jr Center for Social Change v. American Heritage Products Inc, 694 F.2d 674 (11th Cir 1983).

[9]  Hetherington Lee, Direct commercial exploitation of identity: A new age for the right to publicity, Columbia-VLA Journal of Law and the Arts, 17 (1992) 1.

[10] Banerjee B, Celebrity rights: A legal overview, http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l139-CelebrityRights.html (2 January 2010). (last visited on October 6,2023).

[11] Datta A, Celebrity rights: A legal overview, http://www.goforthelaw.com/articles/fromlawstu/article31.htm (21 January 2010). (last visited on October 6,2023).

[12] Tolley v. Fry [1931] AC 333; (1931) 1 All ER Rep 131.

[13] Louis Brandeis D & Warren Samuel D, The right to privacy, Havard Law Review, 4(5)(1890), http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/privacy /Privacy_brand_warr2.html (11 January 2010). (last visited on October 6,2023).

[14] Cohen v. Herbal Concepts Inc (1984) 63 NY.2d 379.

[15] Mccarthy J Thomas, The Spring 1995 Horace S Manges Lecture: The Human Persona as Commercial Property: The Right of Publicity, Columbia-VLA Journal of Law and the Arts, 19 (1995) 131.

[16] Keller Bruce P, Condemned to repeat the past: The reemergence of misappropriation and other common law theories of protection for intellectual property, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 11 (2) (1998) 401.

[17] Midler v. Ford Motor Co & others (1988) 849 F.2d 460 (9th Cir).

[18] Black Hilary May, The role of trademark law in the protection of celebrity personality, Media & Arts Law Review, 7 (2) (2002) 105, 106.

[19] Titus & C Advocates 2008, India guide: Character merchandising in India, http://www.asialaw.com/Article/ 1970665/Channel/16681/India-Guide-Character-merchandiingin-India.html (18 January 2010). (last visited on October 6,2023).

[20] Star India Private Limited v. Leo Burnett India (Pvt) Ltd (2003) 2 B C R 655.

[21] Sim v. Heinz & Co Ltd [1959] 1 WLR 313 1959.

[22] Prather M, Celebrity copyright law, http://www.ehow.com /about_6461739_celebrity-copyright-law.html (7 August 2010). (last visited on October 6,2023).

[23] Raja Pocket Books v. Radha Pocket Books (1997) (40) DRJ 791.

[24] Haque Azmul, 2003, India: Face value: Personality rights and celebrity endorsements, http://www.mondaq.com/ article.asp?articleid=22487 (12 October 2010). (last visited on October 6,2023).

[25] The Preamble, The WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT), http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/treaties/ en/ip/wppt/pdf/trtdocs_wo034.pdf (2 December 2010). (last visited on October 6,2023).

[26] ICC Development (International) Ltd v. Arvee Enterprises (1077) 433 US 562.

[27]Pareek A et al., Protection of celebrity rights-The problems and the solutions, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (6) (2006) 420.

[28]Smt. Manu Bhandari v. Kala Vikas Pictures Pvt Ltd and another, (1986) ( 2) Arb LR 151 (Delhi).

[29]Nath Sehgal v. Union of India and others, (2002) (2) Raj (Delhi) 248.

[30]Bala Krishnan v. R Kanagavel Kamaraj and others, (2000) (3) Arb LR 622.

[31]Phoolan Devi v. Shekar Kapoor and others, (1995) PTC 46.

[32] Manisha Koirala v. Shashilal Nair (2003) (1) AIIMR 426.

[33] Fortune films v. Dev Anand (1079) AIR, Bom 17.

[1] Research Scholar, School of Law, Justice and Governance, Gautam Buddha University

[2] Assistant Professor, School of Law, Justice and Governance, Gautam Buddha University

[3] Dalit Women Rise for Justice: Status Report (2014-2020), AIDMAM-NCDHRC, 2021, Pg 22

[4] Ibid

[5] Saikia, Sailajananda: Discrimination of Fundamental Rights: A Critical Review on the Present Caste Based Status of Dalit’s in India, Journal of Social Welfare and Human Rights March, Vol. 2, Iss. 1, 2014

[6] Kumar, Ajay: Sexual Violence against Dalit Women: An Analytical Study of Intersectionality of Gender, Caste, and Class in India. Journal of International Women's Studies, Vol. 22: Iss. 10, 2021

[7] National Crime Records Bureau, Crime in India, 2011-2021, available at https://ncrb.gov.in/en/crime-in-india

[8] National Crime Records Bureau, Crime in India, 2017-2021, available at https://ncrb.gov.in/en/crime-in-india

[9] Ibid.

[10] National Crime Records Bureau, Crime in India, 2017-2021, available at https://ncrb.gov.in/en/crime-in-india

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ajay: Atrocities on Dalits- A Human Rights Perspective, ILI Law Review, Vol 1, Iss. 54, 2010

[13] Ibid.

[14] Art. 14: “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.”

[15] Supra note 12.

[16] Art. 17: “Untouchability is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden The enforcement of any disability arising out of Untouchability shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law”

[17] Art. 23(1): “Traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention of this provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.”

[18] Agrawal Girish & Gonsalves, Collin: Dalits and The Law, Human Right Law Network, New Delhi, 2005

[19] S. 14, The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

[20] S. 15, The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

[21] Rule 7(1), Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995

[22] S. 18, The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

[23] S. 19, The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

[24] Section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

[25] Section 166 A(c) Indian Penal Code, 1860

[26] Dalit Women Rise for Justice: Status Report (2014-2020), AIDMAM-NCDHRC, 2021, at 72.

[27] See Caste Based Sexual Violence and State Impunity, DHRDNet, March 2022; Dalit Women Rise for Justice, AIDMAM-NCDHR, March 2021; Justice Denied: Sexual Violence and Intersectional Discrimination - Barriers to Accessing Justice for Dalit women and girls in Haryana, India, Equality Now & Swabhiman Society, November 2020

[28] CEHAT, Role of Medico-legal Evidence in Rape Trials: A Review of Judgments at the Sessions Court in Mumbai, 2020

[29] Caste Based Sexual Violence and State Impunity, DHRDNet, March 2022

[30] Justice Denied: Sexual Violence and Intersectional Discrimination - Barriers to Accessing Justice for Dalit women and girls in Haryana, India, Equality Now & Swabhiman Society, November 2020

[31] Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 & Rule 7(2) SCs & STs PoA, Act 1989

[32] Dalit Women Rise for Justice: Status Report (2014-2020), AIDMAM-NCDHRC, Pg 75

[33] Guidelines and Protocols, Medico-legal care for survivors/victims of sexual violence, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, March 19, 2014.

[34] Ibid.

[35] Supra note 26 at 81

[36] Supra note 33

[37] Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

[38] Section 309, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 & Section 14(2) SCs & STs (PoA) Act, 1989

[39] National Crime Records Bureau, Crime in India, 2021, available at https://ncrb.gov.in/en/crime-in-india

[40] Justice Denied: Sexual Violence and Intersectional Discrimination - Barriers to Accessing Justice for Dalit women and girls in Haryana, India, Equality Now & Swabhiman Society, November 2020, at 23

[1] Almut Arneth

[2] United States Agency International Development (USAID), 2023

https://www.usaid.gov/biodiversity/photo-contest

[3] Sustainable Development Goals, 2021: Tackling Biodiversity & Climate Crises Together and Their Combined Social Impacts

https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2021/06/tackling-biodiversity-climate-crises-together-and-their-combined-social-impacts/

[4] World Economic Forum, agenda (2023)

[5] United Nation: Climate Action, 2021

[6] IPCC: Climate change: a threat to human wellbeing and health of the planet. Taking action now can secure our future, (2022)

[7] 7.Emissions Gap Report 2021: The Heat Is On — A World of Climate Promises Not Yet Delivered (UNEP, 2021)

[1] Lucia Zedner, Pre-crime and pre-punishment: a health warning, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, CJM 102, Available at:

[2] Paul Lawrence, The Vagrancy Act (1824) and the Persistence of Pre-emptive Policing in England since 1750, 57(3) The British Journal of Criminology 513-531 (2017). Available at:  <https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azw008>

[3] Ibid.

[4] Stark, Findlay and Bock, Stefanie, Preparatory Offences, University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 64/2018 (2018). Available at SSRN: <https://ssrn.com/abstract=3276568> or <http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3276568>

[5] Diana Wendy Fitzgibbon, Pre-emptive Criminalisation: Risk Control and Alternative Futures, Issues in Community and Criminal Justice Monograph 4 (2004)

[6] Jude McCulloch and Sharon Pickering, “PRE-CRIME AND COUNTER-TERRORISM: Imagining Future Crime in the ‘War on Terror.’” 49(5) The British Journal of Criminology 628-45 (2009) JSTOR, Available at:

[7] Felicific calculus is pleasure measurement concept introduced the Jeremy Bentham. Bentham was a proponent of Utilitarianism which supports acts that cause maximum happiness to maximum number of people, and avoid harm. In felific calculus, seven things are taken into consideration – intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity or remoteness, fecundity, purity, and extent.

[8] R.A. Duff et. al, Public Wrongs, and Civil Order, 13(1) Criminal Law and Philosophy 27-48 (Springer, 2019)

[9] Andrew von Hirsch, The Offence Principle in Criminal Law: Affront to Sensibility or Wrongdoing, 11 K.C.L.J. 78 (2000).

[10] Diana Wendy Fitzgibbon, Institutional Racism, Pre-Emptive Criminalisation and Risk Analysis, 46(2) The Howard Journal 128-144 (2007)

[11] Patrick Keyzer et. al, Pre-emptive Imprisonment for Dangerousness in Queensland under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003: The Constitutional Issues, 11 Psychiatry, Psychol. & L. 244 (2004).

[12] Valsamis Mitsilegas, The Transformation of Privacy in an Era of Pre-Emptive Surveillance, 20 TILBURG L. REV. 35 (2015).

[13] Diana Wendy Fitzgibbon, Pre-emptive Criminalisation: Risk Control and Alternative Futures, Issues in Community and Criminal Justice Monograph 4, NAPO ISBN 0-901617-19-9 (2004)

[14] Srujana Bej, et. al, Construction(s) of Female Criminality: Gender, Caste and State Violence, EPW Engage. Available at:

[1]Indian Competition Act 2002,s.3(5)

[2]Alyssa A.Lutz and Lauren J.Stiroh, “The Relevant Market in IP and Antitrust Litigation”(2003) 9 (4) IP Litigator,

[3]Alyssa A.Lutz and Lauren J.Stiroh, “The Relevant Market in IP and Antitrust Litigation”(2003) 9 (4) IP Litigator,

[4] Goenka Institute of Education and Research v Anjani Kumar Goenka and Anr.,2009 (39) PTC 720 (Del.)

[5] Goenka Institute of Education and Research v Anjani Kumar Goenka and Anr.,2009 (39) PTC 720 (Del.):In this case "Goenka" was a prominent component of the trademarks of both the applicant and the respondent; the rival marks were "Goenka Public School" and "G.D. Goenka Public School."One institution was in Delhi and the other was in Rajasthan.

[6] Indian Competition Act 2002,s.3(5)

[7] Alyssa A.Lutz and Lauren J.Stiroh, “The Relevant Market in IP and Antitrust Litigation”(2003) 9 (4) IP Litigator,

[8]Indian Competition Act 2002,s.2(r): It states that “relevant market” means the market which may be determined by the commission with reference to the relevant product market or the relevant geographic market or with reference to both the markets”

[9]Nguyen, Thanh, Defining Relevant Market Under the European Union Competition Law - Regulations and Practice - Experience for Vietnam (2012). <https://ssrn.com/abstract=2069995 >Accessed on 23/07/2023

[10]Report Of Competition Law Review Committee,Ministry of Corporate Affairs Government of India,2019 July,p.50,available at https://ies.gov.in/pdfs/Report-Competition-CLRC.pdf ,Accessed 30 July 2023

[11] Report Of Competition Law Review Committee,Ministry of Corporate Affairs Government of India,2019 July,p.50,available at https://ies.gov.in/pdfs/Report-Competition-CLRC.pdf ,Accessed 30 July 2023

[12] Indian Competition Act,s.19(5):It states that “) For determining whether a market constitutes a “relevant market” for the purposes of this Act, the Commission shall have due regard to the “relevant geographic market’’ and “relevant product market”

[13] Indian Competition Act 2002,s.2(t)

[14]Shubhalakshmi Bhattacharya & Ganesh BhaskarLata, “A comparative perspective of Competition Law cases in the ride-sharing industry: reflections from Singapore, EU, and India” (2022) 36(3) International Review of Law , Computers & Technology <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13600869.2022.2030026> Accessed 30 July 2023

[15]Shubhalakshmi Bhattacharya & Ganesh BhaskarLata, “A comparative perspective of Competition Law cases in the ride-sharing industry: reflections from Singapore, EU, and India” (2022) 36(3) International Review of Law , Computers & Technology <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13600869.2022.2030026> Accessed 30 July 2023

[16]Indian Competition Act 2002,s.19 (7) provides that "The Commission shall, while determining the relevant product market, have due regard to all or any of the following factors, namely:- (a) physical characteristics or end-use of goods; (b) price of goods or service (c) consumer preferences; (d) exclusion of in-house production; (e) existence of specialized producers; (f) classification of industrial products."

[17]Goenka Institute of Education and Research v Anjani Kumar Goenka and Anr.,2009 (39) PTC 720 (Del.)

[18]Goenka Institute of Education and Research v Anjani Kumar Goenka and Anr.,2009 (39) PTC 720 (Del.): In this case "Goenka" was a prominent component of the trademarks of both the applicant and the respondent; the rival marks were "Goenka Public School" and "G.D. Goenka Public School."One institution was in Delhi and the other was in Rajasthan.

[19] Monsanto Holdings Private Limited & Ors v. CCI & Ors,LPA 247/2016

[20] Indian Competition Act 2002,s.2(t)

[21]Belaire Owners' Association v.Dlf Limited, Huda & Ors,2011 CompLR 0239

[22]Belaire Owners' Association v.Dlf Limited, Huda & Ors,2011 CompLR 0239:In this case,the informants booked the units and paid a significant amount in advance when DLF announced the opening of Group Housing Complexes, known as The Belaire, in Gurgaon. They hardly had any choice but to follow DLF's instructions.The original plan was unilaterally changed by the DLF without notifying the informants.The DLF added 53 percent more flats.The Informants filed a complaint under the Act against DLF, the Haryana Urban Development Authority, and the Department of Town and Country Planning, State of Haryana, citing the construction's unusual delay and significant compression of the common areas and facilities originally designated for each flat. In the lawsuit, the informant claimed that DLF had imposed severe restrictions by abusing its dominating position.

[23] Small but Significant, non-transitory Increase in Price test (popularly known as the “SSNIP test”) which examines whether a sustained increase of approximately 5% in the price of a product would cause consumers to shift their demand to a substitute for that product.The logic behind the SSNIP test is that if the small but significant, non transitory increase in price is not profitable for the hypothetical monopolist, then there exists at least one substitute to the product whose prices were raised as part of the exercise.

[24] Belaire Owners' Association v.Dlf Limited, Huda & Ors,2011 CompLR 0239

[25] Belaire Owners' Association v.Dlf Limited, Huda & Ors,2011 CompLR 0239

[26]The Court states that "Non-residential" properties may include a wide array of properties such as office space, retail shops, commercial space, hotels, storage space, industrial space, infrastructure, sports or amusement spaces etc.Residential properties are buildings where people live, such as stand-alone houses, builder-floors, apartments, row-houses, condominiums or studio-apartments.

[27] Ashish Ahuja v. Snapdeal and others,Case No. 17 of 2014

[28] Mohit Manglani v Flipkart,Case No 80 of 2014

[29] Mohit Manglani v Flipkart,Case No 80 of 2014

[30] Matrimony.Com Limited v. Google LLC & Others,Case Nos. 07 and 30 of 2012

[31] The Consumer Unity and Trust Society ("CUTS") and Matrimony.com had each filed two separate complaints with the CCI. In both of these complaints, Google was accused of abusing its dominant position in the "online search" and "online search advertising" markets by conducting promotional advertisements, biasing search results in favor of its own shopping and travel websites, and creating a search bias. Both concerns were resolved by the CCI with a single order.

[32] Biocon Limited & Ors. v. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ag & Ors.,Case No. 68 of 2016

[33] Rouche created an antibody called trastuzumab, which was  commercialized in India as the medication Herceptin. ,used to attack cancer cells. The company removed Herceptin off the Indian market and replaced it with a less expensive drug called Trastuzumab in an effort to stop rivals from creating biosimilar versions of the drug and to circumvent the need for a compulsory license. Meanwhile, the informants worked  to create a less expensive biosimilar version of it. Following the biosimilar version's release, the sources said that the Roche Group (opposite parties) began pursuing pointless legal battles against other companies in an effort to keep them from entering the "Trastuzumab" market.Furthermore, it was argued that the opposing parties had frivolous conversations with different authorities with the goal of obstructing the entry of its rivals.Furthermore, it was argued that the opposing parties had frivolous conversations with different authorities with the goal of obstructing the entry of its rivals and informant filed a complaint alleging abuse of dominance and anti competitive practises.

[34]Prints India vs Springer India Private Limited,Case No:16 of 2010

[35]Prints India vs Springer India Private Limited,Case No:16 of 2010:Springer India is a division of the global publishing company Springer Science, and India Prints distributes Indian publications.India Prints was subject to multiple additional contractual requirements from Springer India. These requirements included lowering the journal discounts and requiring India Prints to give Springer India the end-user information. Should the information not be submitted, Springer India reserves the right to stop supplying India Prints with more publications. Prints India agreed to these conditions.But it stopped the practise when it began to notice a decline of clientele, for which it gave Springer India the information. Following that, Springer India made the decision to stop providing India Prints with periodicals.

[36]PepsiCo. Inc. And Ors. vs Hindustan Coca Cola Ltd. And Anr.,2003 (27) PTC 305 Del

[37]In this case, Pepsi sued Coca-Cola for improperly exploiting its trademark and defaming its goods in a commercial. When the actor in this commercial asks various people about their preferred beverage, they all name one that has packaging that is strikingly similar to Pepsi. The actor continues, saying they prefer this version since it's overly cutesy and aimed at younger audiences.After being forced to sample both beverages, the children eventually confess that the one they preferred was actually Coca-Cola. The other bottle's packaging was remarkably similar to Pepsi's, and the wording "Pappi" was inscribed in a similar style on the bottle cap.

[38]PepsiCo. Inc. And Ors. vs Hindustan Coca Cola Ltd. And Anr.,2003 (27) PTC 305 Del

[39]M/S Matrimony.Com Limited vs Kalyan Jewellers India Limited,(MAD) 2020-3-226:The appellant holds trademark registrations for a number of additional names that have been developed by combining the language, location, or religion with the term "marriage," such as "Tamil Matrimony," "Kerala Matrimony," and so on. The appellant is also the registered owner of the mark "Bharat Matrimony." A few of the defendants submitted bids for the "AdWords," which are identical to the appellant's trademarks save for the space between the words.The appellant used "infringement" and "passing off" as grounds for filing a lawsuit seeking a permanent injunction.

[40]M/S Matrimony.Com Limited vs Kalyan Jewellers India Limited,(MAD) 2020-3-226:

[41] M/s Nuziveedu Seeds Limited & Others. Vs. Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) Limited (MMBL) & Others,Case No. 107/ 2015

[42] M/s Nuziveedu Seeds Limited & Others. Vs. Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) Limited (MMBL) & Others,Case no 50/2013

[43]Matrimony.Com Limited v. Google LLC & Others,Case Nos. 07 and 30 of 2012