iWorld
Dialling into decline RCom posts heavy losses amid ongoing insolvency
MUMBAI: The lines are anything but clear at Reliance Communications (RCom), which dialled in a staggering consolidated loss of Rs 8,125 crore for the financial year ended 31 March 2025. With the telecom player still navigating the turbulent waters of insolvency, its latest audited results tell a tale of debt, deferred dreams, and deepening losses.
Under the shadow of ongoing corporate insolvency proceedings since 2019, RCom’s affairs remain under the management of resolution professional Anish Niranjan Nanavaty. In a disclosure to stock exchanges, the company reported a loss of Rs 162 crore from continuing operations and an even steeper Rs 7,963 crore loss from discontinued operations, which include legacy telecom assets like spectrum, towers, and fibre assets still listed at 2018 valuations and now held for sale.
Operating income slumped to Rs 278 crore for the year, against expenses of Rs 440 crore. The auditors, however, weren’t convinced everything adds up.
The audit report issued by Pathak H.D. & Associates LLP is riddled with red flags from non-provisioning of interest on borrowings and foreign exchange fluctuations, to unauthorised asset sales and unresolved willful default allegations. “Had the interest and foreign exchange variation been provided,” the auditors note, “the reported loss would have been higher by Rs 5,110 crore, and the net worth lower by Rs 37,573 crore.”
What’s more, RCom continues to default on statutory dues and has not implemented Ind AS 116 for lease accounting, a miss that auditors flagged yet again.
Even as a resolution plan remains pending before the NCLT and the Supreme Court battles over spectrum liabilities drag on, RCom maintains it has prepared its books on a ‘going concern’ basis. A claim auditors aren’t entirely buying, given the sustained erosion in net worth, which now stands at negative Rs 69,204 crore.
Amidst it all, resolution efforts have hit pause. Applications to migrate telecom licences remain stuck in litigation. Multiple petitions before the NCLT, TDSAT, and the Supreme Court including the AGR dues dispute continue to cloud the future of RCom and its affiliates.”
As India’s telecom landscape moves ahead with 5G and AI-driven innovations, RCom remains tethered to unresolved past dues and legal quicksand. Whether it can ring in a revival or continue to be stuck in voicemail remains a question only the courts and creditors can answer.
iWorld
Taylor Swift sued by Maren Wade over Showgirl trademark clash
Las Vegas performer claims hit album branding overshadows her long-held identity
MUMBAI: A high-profile trademark dispute is brewing in the entertainment world as Las Vegas performer Maren Wade has filed a lawsuit against global pop star Taylor Swift over the title of her latest album.
Filed on March 30 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the suit accuses Swift and UMG Recordings of trademark infringement, false designation and unfair competition. At the centre of the dispute is Swift’s chart-topping album The Life of a Showgirl, released in October 2025.
Wade argues that the album’s title and branding are confusingly similar to her long-established trademark Confessions of a Showgirl, which she has built since 2014. What began as a column in Las Vegas Weekly has since expanded into a touring stage show, podcast and book, with a federal trademark secured in 2015.
The complaint leans heavily on the concept of reverse confusion. Wade claims Swift’s global popularity has effectively drowned out her brand, leaving audiences to assume she is imitating the singer rather than the other way around. The lawsuit cites instances of fans using Wade’s trademarked phrase in connection with Swift’s album and search results increasingly pointing to Swift-related content.
A key element of the case involves the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which had already raised concerns. According to the filing, the office issued a partial refusal of Swift’s trademark application in late 2025, citing a likelihood of confusion due to shared phrasing and overlapping entertainment categories.
“They did not do so quietly,” the complaint notes, referring to the album’s rollout, which quickly extended into merchandise, labels and retail branding aimed at a similar audience.
Wade is seeking a permanent injunction to stop further use of the title, along with a share of profits, damages and legal costs. The stakes are high given the album’s commercial success, with over four million units sold in its first week in the United States alone.
Taylor Swift, known for her expansive intellectual property portfolio, operates through entities such as TAS Rights Management and Bravado, which manage her trademarks and global merchandising operations.
The outcome could hinge on whether the court sees the similarity as coincidence or confusion. For now, the case sets the stage for a legal showdown that may determine who truly owns the spotlight in the “showgirl” story.
