Delhi High Court: Canva Ordered to Halt Feature for Alleged Patent Infringement

Summary: The Delhi High Court issued a temporary order stopping Canva from using a feature because it allegedly copied RxPrism's invention. The court found Canva's "Present and Record" feature to be very similar to RxPrism's patented system.

The Dispute Begins

RxPrism Health Systems, a startup focused on digital customer engagement, has a patent for a system that helps create and share interactive content. They claim Canva's "Present and Record" feature is too similar to their patented system.

Court Proceedings and Initial Rulings

On January 28, 2026, the Delhi High Court, with Judges Om Prakash Shukla and C. Hari Shankar, ruled in favor of RxPrism, issuing a temporary order. This decision was based on a previous ruling from July 18, 2023, which found Canva's feature to be too similar to the patented system.

"In view of the above discussion, the Defendant shall stand restrained from making available their Canva product with the 'Present and Record' feature..." — Judge Om Prakash Shukla

Key Arguments and Findings

• RxPrism's Claim: Their system allows creating interactive content without combining different parts, which Canva allegedly copied.
• Canva's Defense: They argued that the patent was not valid and that their feature was different enough not to be considered a copy.
• Court's Analysis: The court found that even though there were differences, Canva's feature did almost the same thing in a similar way, so it was considered a copy.

The Role of the Doctrine of Equivalents

The court used the Doctrine of Equivalents, which means a product can still be considered a copy even if it doesn't exactly match every detail, as long as it does almost the same thing in the same way.

Financial Implications

Canva was told to deposit Rs. 50 lakhs as a security measure for using the feature in India, reflecting the court's concern about possible market issues and harm to RxPrism.

Summary of the Verdict

The court maintained the temporary order, noting that RxPrism had shown a strong initial case of copying. This decision shows how important it is to protect inventions and the difficulties companies face with intellectual property laws.

"The appeal is, therefore, dismissed." — Final judgment

This case is a reminder of the complexities involved in patent disputes, especially in the tech industry, where new ideas and intellectual property rights often clash.