 |
| Image from here |
This week, we come to the readers with the review slightly late and will be covering all the posts in the past 2 weeks since the January Week 1 Review by Sai Vinod. Given the higher number of blog posts to reminisce about, this weekly review won’t have a separate section referring to the global IP happenings this week.
It all started with Mathews carrying a detailed and incisive post in 2 parts (here and here) introducing the much-discussed Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, 2013, which was recently unveiled at the 100th Indian Science Congress. He subsequently came up with a superb analytical post on various facets of the Policy, which has already drawn praise from several quarters.
This was followed by a post drawing the readers’ attention to a blog post at Indiacorplaw regarding whether independent directors and minority shareholder voting can provide a solution to MNCs taking advantage of the relaxation of norms for royalty payment by their Indian subsidiaries.
Prashant, while referring to a post by Abantika Ghosh of the Indian Express on the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) having started to issue compulsory licences for three commonly used anti-cancer drugs (Herceptin, Ixabepilone and Dasatinib), went on to distinguish between the CLs issued u/s 84 and 92 of the Patents Act, 1970 respectively and also wondered about the possible impact of such a move on the Big Pharma companies. Subsequently, Madhulika Vishwanathan, who’s now a part of the Spicy IP team, carried on a post examining the possible legal provisions that could have been used in pursuing this decision, and also how generics may follow up on this decision by noting the differences in approach that they will have to take regarding small molecule drugs and biologics. Soon after, Prashant carried another brilliant post revealing the political economy and interplay behind the generic lobbying efforts that might have culminated into such an action by the Indian government and role played by Yusuf Hamied, the head of Cipla.
Prashant followed this up with a rather interesting post on whether there exists a possibility that the mandatory royalty-sharing provisions introduced by the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 can be bypassed by the parties to the contract choosing a foreign jurisdiction as the applicable law and then ensuring that the copyright flowing from such foreign law is respected in India vide S. 40 of the Copyright Act.
A lively debate ensued in the blog following the unfortunate demise of Aaron Swartz, the young activist involved in issues surrounding copyright policy and technology freedom. Swaraj came up with a moving post about Swartz’s achievements and speculating whether available information may indicate that the legal and prosecutorial pressures being piled on Swartz by the US Department of Justice were in any way responsible for his suicide. Shortly after this, Prashant made a strong argument about the need to ensure that Swartz’s death is not used as a rallying cry for those who would like nothing better than to hack into the computer networks and trespassing into private property, thereby flouting the laws of the land in the process. Prashant’s post attracted a lot of heated remarks both in the blog as well as other fora like twitter and the unfortunate and repeated ad hominem attacks directed against him finally led him to make his rebuttal known in a best possible logical manner in another post. Sometime later, Shamnad himself commented on the legacy that Swartz left for us and emphasized upon the need to have open access to resources and information, especially in sectors like education, drawing on instances such as DU Copyright controversy. In the same lines, Swaraj posted a while later looking into the genesis and evolution of the Open Access Movement, especially the UK stance relating thereto.
Prashant then came up with a report on how Mark Lynas, former anti-GM activist has surprisingly and publicly reversed his stance on genetically modified food and given the latter his approval in a conference down at Oxford.
Meanwhile, a post was carried on as a Spicy IP event about Patracode’s workshop on January 21 that sought to introduce various solutions which can simplify researching and managing IP for a business organization and support its IPR, R&D and Legal Department.
Then it was the turn of one of the applicants for the Spicy IP Fellowship, L. Gopika Murthy, to present a refreshing outlook on the copyright infringement and issues over terms of service relating to social media, as were highlighted in Agence France Presse v. Daniel Morel, concerning copyright of content posted on Twitter and Twitpic and the Indian position regarding such matters. Gopika carried on another post in the Fellowship series on Madurai Malli, the jasmine flower known for its fragrance and its distinctive petal colour, having become the first horticultural product from Tamil Nadu to have been granted a GI status.
The Delhi High Court’s order endorsing the concept of international exhaustion under the trademark law had been appealed against by Samsung at the Supreme Court, which formed the subject of the next post by Shamnad, wherein he also provided a succinct explanation of the concept of exhaustion itself.
A guest post by Snigdha Roy, another applicant for the Fellowship, about the upcoming trend of patenting mobile apps that had started with the mobile company Lava having applied for the patents for 100 such apps, was next in line. Snigdha’s next post was meant to take the readers behind the scenes of online piracy in India and the funding mechanisms there for.
The next post was again a guest post, this time by Anubha Sinha, another Fellowship applicant, who touched upon the unusual topic of bare licensing, its treatment under the Indian and foreign jurisdictions and whether it can lead to abandonment of trademark. Anubha’s next post looks at the research and patents behind Graphene (labeled the world’s thinnest material), the tremendous patent activity surrounding it in the rest of the world and the manner in which Indian research centers have been left far behind in terms of patent applications, despite important research being carried out in Indian universities. In her 3rd post, Anubha ventured into hitherto little-explored territory, arguing about the urgent need to involve and adapt our IPR policy to better address the fight against climate change.
Aparajita Lath, another applicant, started her fellowship contention strongly with an incisive post on business method patents, the manner in which they are still being granted in India subverting the express statutory exclusion of the same and the policy considerations involved therein. Aparajita’s next post dealt with the application that had been filed to obtain GI status for Meerut Scissors and the status of GIs in India in general. Aparajita then went on to carry a post addressing the concern whether the Indian IPR regime has attained the maturity to cater to the needs of the creative average and low-income Indian innovators yet.
It was Swaraj’s turn next to come up with a post, wherein he’d reproduced the annual calendar of the International Trademark Association’s various events, conferences and meetings for the benefit of the readers.
Prashant then rued the lack of progress of the 2 PILs filed at the Madras High Court challenging the constitutionality of the IPAB, one of which had been filed by Shamnad himself, but scarcely any development has taken place regarding them in the past 2 years.
Shamnad then sought to look into whether Big Pharma is using the RTI route to ambush the generic pharma companies in pre-emptive lawsuits, many of which seem to be lacking in substance.
An extremely relevant and important post was then put forth by Rajiv examining in great details the legality of decompilation of software under the Indian Copyright Act and the issues pertaining thereto, including a jurisdictional comparison with the US and EU laws. (see here and here)
Finally, this review ends with extending a warm welcome to our 3 new Fellows, Anubha, Gopika and Aparajita, all bright young minds from NLUs, as well as Madhulika Vishwanathan, the new Spicy IP team member, all of whom would undoubtedly prove to be invaluable assets to the team in the days to come.
That’s all for now, readers. We’ll get back to you with loads of new developments and news throughout this week and at the end of it vide our next review. Till then, happy reading!
It all started with Mathews carrying a detailed and incisive post in 2 parts (here and here) introducing the much-discussed Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, 2013, which was recently unveiled at the 100th Indian Science Congress. He subsequently came up with a superb analytical post on various facets of the Policy, which has already drawn praise from several quarters.
This was followed by a post drawing the readers’ attention to a blog post at Indiacorplaw regarding whether independent directors and minority shareholder voting can provide a solution to MNCs taking advantage of the relaxation of norms for royalty payment by their Indian subsidiaries.
Prashant, while referring to a post by Abantika Ghosh of the Indian Express on the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) having started to issue compulsory licences for three commonly used anti-cancer drugs (Herceptin, Ixabepilone and Dasatinib), went on to distinguish between the CLs issued u/s 84 and 92 of the Patents Act, 1970 respectively and also wondered about the possible impact of such a move on the Big Pharma companies. Subsequently, Madhulika Vishwanathan, who’s now a part of the Spicy IP team, carried on a post examining the possible legal provisions that could have been used in pursuing this decision, and also how generics may follow up on this decision by noting the differences in approach that they will have to take regarding small molecule drugs and biologics. Soon after, Prashant carried another brilliant post revealing the political economy and interplay behind the generic lobbying efforts that might have culminated into such an action by the Indian government and role played by Yusuf Hamied, the head of Cipla.
Prashant followed this up with a rather interesting post on whether there exists a possibility that the mandatory royalty-sharing provisions introduced by the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 can be bypassed by the parties to the contract choosing a foreign jurisdiction as the applicable law and then ensuring that the copyright flowing from such foreign law is respected in India vide S. 40 of the Copyright Act.
A lively debate ensued in the blog following the unfortunate demise of Aaron Swartz, the young activist involved in issues surrounding copyright policy and technology freedom. Swaraj came up with a moving post about Swartz’s achievements and speculating whether available information may indicate that the legal and prosecutorial pressures being piled on Swartz by the US Department of Justice were in any way responsible for his suicide. Shortly after this, Prashant made a strong argument about the need to ensure that Swartz’s death is not used as a rallying cry for those who would like nothing better than to hack into the computer networks and trespassing into private property, thereby flouting the laws of the land in the process. Prashant’s post attracted a lot of heated remarks both in the blog as well as other fora like twitter and the unfortunate and repeated ad hominem attacks directed against him finally led him to make his rebuttal known in a best possible logical manner in another post. Sometime later, Shamnad himself commented on the legacy that Swartz left for us and emphasized upon the need to have open access to resources and information, especially in sectors like education, drawing on instances such as DU Copyright controversy. In the same lines, Swaraj posted a while later looking into the genesis and evolution of the Open Access Movement, especially the UK stance relating thereto.
Prashant then came up with a report on how Mark Lynas, former anti-GM activist has surprisingly and publicly reversed his stance on genetically modified food and given the latter his approval in a conference down at Oxford.
Meanwhile, a post was carried on as a Spicy IP event about Patracode’s workshop on January 21 that sought to introduce various solutions which can simplify researching and managing IP for a business organization and support its IPR, R&D and Legal Department.
Then it was the turn of one of the applicants for the Spicy IP Fellowship, L. Gopika Murthy, to present a refreshing outlook on the copyright infringement and issues over terms of service relating to social media, as were highlighted in Agence France Presse v. Daniel Morel, concerning copyright of content posted on Twitter and Twitpic and the Indian position regarding such matters. Gopika carried on another post in the Fellowship series on Madurai Malli, the jasmine flower known for its fragrance and its distinctive petal colour, having become the first horticultural product from Tamil Nadu to have been granted a GI status.
The Delhi High Court’s order endorsing the concept of international exhaustion under the trademark law had been appealed against by Samsung at the Supreme Court, which formed the subject of the next post by Shamnad, wherein he also provided a succinct explanation of the concept of exhaustion itself.
A guest post by Snigdha Roy, another applicant for the Fellowship, about the upcoming trend of patenting mobile apps that had started with the mobile company Lava having applied for the patents for 100 such apps, was next in line. Snigdha’s next post was meant to take the readers behind the scenes of online piracy in India and the funding mechanisms there for.
The next post was again a guest post, this time by Anubha Sinha, another Fellowship applicant, who touched upon the unusual topic of bare licensing, its treatment under the Indian and foreign jurisdictions and whether it can lead to abandonment of trademark. Anubha’s next post looks at the research and patents behind Graphene (labeled the world’s thinnest material), the tremendous patent activity surrounding it in the rest of the world and the manner in which Indian research centers have been left far behind in terms of patent applications, despite important research being carried out in Indian universities. In her 3rd post, Anubha ventured into hitherto little-explored territory, arguing about the urgent need to involve and adapt our IPR policy to better address the fight against climate change.
Aparajita Lath, another applicant, started her fellowship contention strongly with an incisive post on business method patents, the manner in which they are still being granted in India subverting the express statutory exclusion of the same and the policy considerations involved therein. Aparajita’s next post dealt with the application that had been filed to obtain GI status for Meerut Scissors and the status of GIs in India in general. Aparajita then went on to carry a post addressing the concern whether the Indian IPR regime has attained the maturity to cater to the needs of the creative average and low-income Indian innovators yet.
It was Swaraj’s turn next to come up with a post, wherein he’d reproduced the annual calendar of the International Trademark Association’s various events, conferences and meetings for the benefit of the readers.
Prashant then rued the lack of progress of the 2 PILs filed at the Madras High Court challenging the constitutionality of the IPAB, one of which had been filed by Shamnad himself, but scarcely any development has taken place regarding them in the past 2 years.
Shamnad then sought to look into whether Big Pharma is using the RTI route to ambush the generic pharma companies in pre-emptive lawsuits, many of which seem to be lacking in substance.
An extremely relevant and important post was then put forth by Rajiv examining in great details the legality of decompilation of software under the Indian Copyright Act and the issues pertaining thereto, including a jurisdictional comparison with the US and EU laws. (see here and here)
Finally, this review ends with extending a warm welcome to our 3 new Fellows, Anubha, Gopika and Aparajita, all bright young minds from NLUs, as well as Madhulika Vishwanathan, the new Spicy IP team member, all of whom would undoubtedly prove to be invaluable assets to the team in the days to come.
That’s all for now, readers. We’ll get back to you with loads of new developments and news throughout this week and at the end of it vide our next review. Till then, happy reading!
