Canonsphere

CSINv3
Category

Volume 1

Category

This Legislative Comment has been written by Gokul. He is a 3rd-year B.B.A. LL.B. (Hons) Student at VIT School of Law. He is more inclined towards legal research and understanding the core purpose of law.

ABSTRACT

The overactive proliferation of Over-the-Top (OTT) platforms as Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Disney+ Hotstar, has radically altered the landscape of entertainment in India and introduced a level of affordable, true democratic access to content, as a side effect of becoming an incubator of advanced levels of digital media piracy. As opposed to classical pirating with CDs or through torrents, modern pirating continues to prosper in encrypted systems such as Telegram and WhatsApp, with copyright materials getting leaked and shared within a few hours of their publication. This legislative comment is a reaction against the failure of the existing legislation, especially the Copyright Act, 1957 and the Information Technology Act, 2000 to deal with encrypted digital piracy. Even with amendments in place, these laws are ill prepared to address the level, anonymity as well as transboundary characteristics of piracy enabled by encrypted platforms.

The legislative comment examines the legislation gap, failures of intermediate liability and ineffectiveness of John Doe orders in these digital environments. It highlights the necessity to conduct urgent legal reform, in particular, an implementation of co-liability regime of platforms, implementation of real-time takedown procedures, redefining of digital piracy based on the Copyright Act and reshaping closer alignment with the Intermediary Rules, 2021. It also promotes greater cooperation among countries by means of Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs) and data localization. Finally, the comment makes a recommendation to drastically change the copyright law in India to reflect the realities of the digital age of distributing content so that they ultimately protect economic gains, but also the integrity of creative work in the age of OTT.

Powered By EmbedPress

This legislative Comment is written by Palak Bharadwaj, a 4th year B.A.LL.B. student at Dr. Hari Singh Gaur University, she is a passionate student with ability to simplify complex legal concepts.

ABSTRACT

A design is anything that is applied to an article; it is not an item in and of itself.  It must be supplied as completed goods to the manufacturer. By offering a legislative framework for the preservation of designs, the Design Act is essential to preserving the aesthetic appeal of industrial goods. Articles’ aesthetic rights are governed by the Industrial Design Act, which makes sure that unique and creative designs aren’t stolen or used for commercial purposes without permission. As part of an all-encompassing legal framework, the Copyright Act of 1988 also offers overlapping protection for specific creative designs. Design registration is explicitly covered by India’s Design Act, 2000, which gives designers the ability to get exclusive rights to their original creations. Under the Design Act of 2000, a design can be registered by submitting an application to the Controller of Designs, which will then be reviewed, published, and, if all requirements are satisfied, certified. When combined, these legal tools seek to safeguard intellectual property, foster innovation, and elevate industrial design’s aesthetics.

Powered By EmbedPress

This Legislative Comment has been written by Keerthana N R. She is pursuing LLM in Intellectual Property Rights. She has a keen interest in legal drafting and in-depth research, aiming to bridge theory and practice within the evolving field of IP law with an aspiration to contribute impactful insights and precise analysis through both her academic and professional endeavors.

ABSTRACT

The Digital Data Protection Act 2023 is a vital piece of legislation reacting to the changing dynamics of data privacy and protection in India, in the wake of the Supreme Court’s momentous ruling in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India that declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right. Previous legislations, such as the Information Technology Act 2000, did not well cover the intricacies of contemporary data use and privacy issues. The new Act has given a holistic, cross-sectoral legal environment for protecting personal data in the face of rapid technological advances. It reflects India’s resolve to create effective privacy governance structures that are necessary not merely for individual rights protection but also for the promotion of transparent, sustainable organizational behavior. By addressing business risks and reputational concerns of data breaches, the Act places India at the vanguard of international data protection efforts, attesting to the emerging status of privacy in the digital era.

Powered By EmbedPress

This Short article has been written by Rishika Jha. She is a Law student at Amity University, Mumbai.

ABSTRACT

The frameworks for bankruptcy and insolvency in the US and India are compared in this article, with an emphasis on their respective histories, procedural distinctions, and effects on corporate settings. India’s Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) of 2016 introduced a creditor-in-control model, where the management of a defaulting company is suspended, and a Committee of Creditors takes charge of the resolution process. In contrast, the US Chapter 11 bankruptcy system follows a debtor-in-possession approach, allowing existing management to retain control during restructuring, which generally supports business rehabilitation and continuity. While the IBC has streamlined insolvency proceedings in India and improved creditor confidence, challenges such as procedural delays, frequent amendments, and limited cross-border insolvency provisions persist. A strong legal system and well-defined procedures for international collaboration, which make it easier to recognise foreign bankruptcy cases, are advantages of the US framework. The practical impact of these variations on stakeholders, such as creditors, shareholders, and workers, are also covered in the study, with a focus on how bankruptcy laws affect market dynamics and corporate risk-taking. It further identifies shortcomings such as India’s need for enhanced judicial capacity, formal cross-border protocols, and procedural consistency, while noting that the US could improve oversight and expedite proceedings to prevent potential abuses of the debtor-in-possession model. Ultimately, the paper argues that both countries can learn from each other: India by incorporating more debtor friendly measures and strengthening international cooperation, and the US by refining procedural efficiency. This comparative study aims to provide valuable insights for policymakers, legal practitioners, and business stakeholders to foster more effective insolvency regimes that support economic growth and stability in an increasingly globalized market

Powered By EmbedPress

This Short article has been written by SOWMYA.A and co- authored by Dr. ARUN.D RAJ. Sowmya and Arun are Law Students at School of Law, Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT) University Chennai Campus, Chennai.

ABSTRACT

This AI-generated content now has a different meaning than that of the machine learning and neural network point of view. This vary technological breakthrough raises challenges and discussions worldwide about what is human and machine creativity. There are different histories of copyright and authorship connected to one another through the case studies of AI-generated works and the disputes created over them. Indeed, the legal situation is beset by a formidable challenge-how do AI-generated content and concepts find a place within copyright law? Differing practices across nations are more than enough evidence that there exist significant gaps in the global copyright guidelines. Integration between governments, companies, artists, and additional parties will be sorely needed to produce frameworks still to come. The benefits of AI-generated content are many, such as increased efficiency, enhanced creativity, better access, and wider diversity among kinds of creative output. And these benefits come hand in hand with aligning the risks it poses-stability versus quality, originality, job displacement, and ethical aspects concerning bias and fair use. The frequency of impacting creators and industries will be unseen; tackling these issues evokes a great deal of active thinking and innovative approaches to achieving commonality in creativity between humanity and artificial intelligence. To follow trends, adaptation always needs to be ensured in the future by working together. Therefore, a holistic approach is significant in understanding and managing AI-generated content towards a restorative and innovative future for the creative industries.

Powered By EmbedPress

This Long Article has been written by GOPIKA.B and co-authored by Dr. ARUN.D RAJ. Gopika and Arun are Law students at Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT) University, Chennai campus.

ABSTRACT

Indigenous Traditional Knowledge (TK) encompasses the distinctive traditions, agricultural practices, medicinal practices, and folklore of indigenous people that have been accumulating for centuries. The contemporary laws of intellectual property (IP) consider TK to be lacking protective measures which undermines its immense significance, both scientific and cultural. This research attempts to find a solution at the intersection of TK and IP law by highlighting the comprehensive legal system which seems to provide a framework to address the uniqueness of TK and its moral intricacies in achieving justice for Indigenous peoples. This paper outlines categories of TK, their value in contemporary society, and other issues concerning misappropriation and exploitation. This research attempts to provide an analysis of existing paradigms of IP and explain why they do not provide adequate protection to TK, leading to the conflicts emerging vis a vis varying notion of rights and ownership. This research investigates more actively other global instruments like the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Nagoya Protocol and develops a systemic survey of regional modern approaches to the problem of TK protection. This research aims to analyze case studies of attempts to conserve TK and identify the lessons learned from both successes and failures. It promotes solution approaches applicable at the time like the community centered approaches, hybrid legal approaches, and democratic society functions with indigenous participation in decision making within policies. The conclusion highlights the need to try to achieve a better balance of ethical harmony concerning indigenous peoples and contemporary frameworks of intellectual property systems. The results of this study explain the need for urgent collective action to resolve the problematic issue of straining the deadlock of safeguarding the TK while promoting innovation and economic growth. In this paper, there is a strong policy advocacy appeal directed toward governments and inter-parliamentary international bodies stressing the serious need to take steps to protect, preserve, and sustain traditional knowledge as a part of intangible cultural heritage and public health resources.

Powered By EmbedPress

This Long Article has been written by Muskan. She is a Law Student at S.S Jain Subodh Law College, Jaipur.

ABSTRACT

In an increasingly innovation-driven economy, mergers and acquisitions (M&A) have evolved from mere expansion tools to pivotal mechanisms shaping industry competition. Traditional merger control, which primarily focuses on market share and price effects, is being reassessed to address the dynamic challenges posed by innovation. This is especially pertinent in sectors like pharmaceuticals, artificial intelligence (AI), and fintech, where the pace of technological advancements has redefined competitive boundaries.
A key concern in the modern merger landscape is the phenomenon of “killer acquisitions,” where dominant firms acquire emerging innovators to neutralize potential competitive threats. Such acquisitions often prevent the disruptive potential of nascent technologies, stifling future innovation. This article explores the theoretical underpinnings of merger control in innovation-driven markets, specifically the innovation harm theory, which suggests that mergers can undermine future market competition by eliminating potential competitors.
The article further contrasts ex-ante and ex-post regulatory mechanisms, evaluating their respective roles in preventing anti-competitive consolidation without stifling market growth. Through case studies such as Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram, Bayer’s merger with Monsanto, and the Zee-Sony merger in India, the article critically assesses how competition regulators have navigated the complex intersection of innovation and market consolidation.
A comparative analysis of merger review practices in the European Union, the United States, and India reveals varying approaches to balancing innovation concerns with economic efficiency. The article concludes by advocating for a more nuanced, innovation-sensitive merger review framework that prioritizes technological progress while ensuring legal certainty and pro-competitive outcomes. By adjusting the focus of merger control, regulators can better navigate the challenges of fostering innovation while preventing monopolistic tendencies in high-tech industries.

Powered By EmbedPress

This Long article has been written by Aseem Simlote. He is a Law Student at S.S Jain Subodh Law College, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

ABSTRACT

In the digital age, traditional notions of market power and competition are being upended by the rapid rise of
tech giants such as Google, Amazon, Meta (formerly Facebook), and Apple. These firms operate in multi-sided markets where data is the new currency, and services are often offered for free, raising significant challenges for the application of existing competition law frameworks. The classical focus of antitrust enforcement on price effects and output limitations struggles to capture the full scope of dominance exerted in zero-price markets. This article seeks to reassess the foundations of competition law in the face of digital dominance.
Beginning with an exploration of the shift from price-centric to data-centric models of market dominance, the article analyzes how big tech companies accumulate, control, and monetize vast troves of personal data to entrench their market position. It further examines the unique challenges of enforcing abuse of dominance provisions in environments where consumers are not charged in monetary terms but pay with their attention
and data.
The article also investigates the roles of algorithms, self-preferencing, and gatekeeping behaviors, which allow dominant platforms to control market access, favor their own services, and manipulate market outcomes in their favor. A comparative study of global antitrust responses—including the European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), ongoing antitrust reforms in the United States, and the actions of India’s Competition Commission (CCI)—offers insight into how jurisdictions are adapting their legal frameworks to respond to these new market dynamics.
The article concludes by advocating for a modernized, principle-based approach to competition law that incorporates technological realities, ensures fair digital markets, and safeguards innovation and consumer welfare. This includes recommendations for legislative amendments, broader definitions of market power, and enhanced enforcement tools for competition authorities.

Powered By EmbedPress

This Long article has been written by M. Nithya Sri. She is a 4th Year law student, pursuing BALLB from The Central Law College, Salem, Tamil Nadu.

ABSTRACT

The rapid ascent of big tech firms has fundamentally transformed global markets, challenging the efficacy of traditional competition laws. These digital conglomerates leverage vast data troves, sophisticated algorithms and expensive ecosystems to entrench their market position, often blurring the lines between innovation and anti-competition behaviour. The digital economy is increasingly dominated by a handful of technology giants whose control over data, infrastructure and algorithms challenges the underpinning traditional competition law. Special attention is paid to how algorithms and data collection practices are used to entrench monopolistic position, often in ways that are invisible or difficult to detect by regulators.
This paper also considers how privacy violations and opaque consent mechanics intersect with competition concerns, particularly through consumer lock-in and data-driven market advantages.

Powered By EmbedPress

This Case Comment has been written by Sneha Awasthi, a third Year law student from Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj University, Kanpur. She has prior experience in research, drafting, and published legal writing.

ABSTRACT

The Delhi High Court in Star India Pvt. Ltd. v. Moviestrunk.com & Ors . tackled digital piracy head-on after Star India’s film Mission Mangal was leaked online by 67 rogue websites. With no response to takedown notices and release at risk, the court swiftly issued an ex parte injunction, blocking the sites and directing ISPs, registrars, and government bodies to act. The case sets a strong precedent for urgent copyright protection in the digital era.

Powered By EmbedPress