SpicyIP Weekly Review (21st-27th April, 2014)

The SpicyIP Story of the Week is Swaraj’s post commemorating World IP Day, titled ‘Movies and IP: Taking a Look on World IP Day’, where he discusses the relationship between IP and the world of movies.

The week began with Thomas reporting on the dispute between GoDaddy, the global domain name registrar and the National Stock Exchange. It has been alleged by the NSE that Manshi Systems, a technology firm was providing access to the information in NSE’s databases, and the website was hosted by GoDaddy. The plaint alleges copyright and trademark infringement. Thomas discussed several issues in the post, including the possibility of GoDaddy being sued as an intermediary under the Information Technology Act and how this case  “provides  the perfect opportunity to challenge the constitutional validity of the intermediary guidelines”

I then posted on the IGIR-IEEM ‘Intellectual Property Management Event’ to be held from 12th-21st May in Macao, registrations for which are still open. Substantial discounts are available for students from developing countries.

Mathews then brought us the tidbit that the Gurgaon court issued an interim order restraining a management institute from using its name and acronym ‘ISEED’ noting that it is deceptively similar to the name of another business school, ‘iSEED’. 

Anubha then reported that the US Trade Representative (USTR) is currently reviewing the Indian IP Regime. She notes that an unfavourable report will lead to downgrading India’s status to that of a ‘Priority Foreign Country’, which could possibly entail trade sanctions on India. Indian officials, meanwhile, maintain that India’s IP Regime is TRIPs-compliant, and any imposition of penalty on India might result in India approaching the WTO.

This was followed by Aparajita’s post on the Mylan dispute, where a review petition filed by Mylan Laboratories in relation to a patent granted to Yeda Research Development was dismissed by the Indian Patent Office. The grounds for dismissal were that Mylan has no locus standi, the petition was delayed by 10 years and that the matter was sub judice before the Delhi HC.

Finally, Thomas brought to us a recent decision of the Bombay High Court where the High Court ordered the Patent Office to correct its records regarding the non-payment of annuities and the resulting lapse of the petitioner’s patent. Noting the “communication gap” that had occurred, the HC ordered that the patent of the petitioners (Teijin Ltd.) be restored.

Notable International Developments:

1)      IP-Watch reports that the UN IPCC has come out with a Working Group Report titled ‘Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change’. The Report makes several suggestions regarding IP policy changes in facilitating technology transfers and green technology innovation.

2)      A Breast cancer drug has been turned down by the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence for use by the NHS due to its high cost ( £90,000 per patient)- The Guardian

3)      In what is being hailed by internet activists as the “death knell of net neutrality”, The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) of the USA has announced that it will propose new rules that allow faster lanes for certain companies to send video and other content to their customers.  Read the response of Tom Wheeler, president of the FCC,  here.

4)      IPKat has also covered, in a series of posts, the 22nd Annual Intellectual Property Law & Policy Conference held by Fordham Intellectual Property Law and Policy Conference. Read about the session on FTA Law and Policy here.

5)      IPKat also Reports that a Spanish District Court has held that a Spanish P2P music-sharing service (known as the “Spanish Napster”) cannot be held liable for copyright infringement of the music shared on the platform. The Court creatively interpreted the law, to hold that “use of the software did not imply a direct copyright infringement, as neither the reproduction right not the making available right could be infringed by the defendant when all the file-sharing activities were carried out exclusively by users, and between their computers.”



About The Author

Leave a Comment

Scroll to Top