May 2015

Onbrez patent infringement suit update: Cipla offers to pay Novartis reasonable royalty for patent

/ By / Patent

Recently, the Onbrez patent injunction appeal case came up for hearing. In an interesting twist, Cipla offered to pay Novartis a reasonable royalty fee, if it was allowed to continue selling generic version of Onbrez! Reportedly Novartis was not enthusiastic and flatly refused Cipla’s offer. As readers may remember in November 2014, Cipla had launched a low cost generic version of Novartis’ Onbrez (Indacetorol – a drug used to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease). Cipla had further petitioned to the […]

Onbrez patent infringement suit update: Cipla offers to pay Novartis reasonable royalty for patent Read More »

From Innovation to Outnovation?

/ By / Copyright, Innovation, Patent

I was asked to do a post on innovation for the Infosys Science Foundation blog. So here goes. I lament on the triteness of the term “innovation” and argue that we should add another term to our innovation lexicon, namely: “outnovation”! As if we didn’t have enough words already! But then wordplay is the only play some of us know. Original article on the Infosys Blog can be found here, and the text of the piece is below: Lexicological Innovation: Outnovation? 

From Innovation to Outnovation? Read More »

The Lisbon Agreement : Why the GI cum Trademark System may work to its own detriment(Part II)

/ By / Geographical Indication

(This post is Part II of a two part series, where I discuss the trademark system adopted for protection of GIs in a number of countries ) Historically, there has really been no uniform approach to GI protection. That the WIPO Lisbon Treaty Negotiations at Geneva remains closed to non-member states is a major source of worry to countries like the USA, Australia and Canada for fear that the revised agreement may fail to consider and include within its ambit

The Lisbon Agreement : Why the GI cum Trademark System may work to its own detriment(Part II) Read More »

The Lisbon Agreement : An exclusive WIPO minority more equal than others? (Part I)

/ By / Geographical Indication

The WIPO  supposedly supports negotiations that uphold the principles of open participation so as to provide all the members of the organisation a fair opportunity to propose their arguments for or against the matter under negotiation – however The Diplomatic Conference for the Adoption of a New Act of the Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and their International Registration that is currently underway at Geneva seems to be anything but representative of just that. Part I

The Lisbon Agreement : An exclusive WIPO minority more equal than others? (Part I) Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 4 – May 17)

/ By / Others

The blog saw a huge amount of action over the last couple of weeks, so this belated highlight-reel is going to be longer than usual. Highlight of the week(s) Over the last two weeks, Swaraj and Shamnad raised questions over inconsistencies that run rampant in the framing of India’s IPR policy. First, Swaraj put together a timeline of events demonstrating the kind of doublespeak that’s pervaded the higher echelons of the government in the last few months. Shamnad then attempted

SpicyIP Weekly Review (May 4 – May 17) Read More »

“King Copyright” has no place in a Democracy

/ By / Copyright

A few weeks ago, the Centre for Internet and Society and the Observer Research Foundation organized a conference focusing on “Freedom of Expression in a Digital Age” in association with the Internet Policy Observatory of the Center for Global Communication Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. For their panel on “Balancing Freedom of Expression and other digital rights”, I was invited to discuss Copyrights in this context. While I wasn’t able to make it to the Conference, I did send in a

“King Copyright” has no place in a Democracy Read More »

Bombay HC Orders YouTube to Remove ‘IIFW Masterclass’ Episodes

/ By / Copyright

On 21st April, the Bombay HC granted ad-interim injunction relief to Indian Independent Filmmakers Worldwide Association (IIFWA) in a suit for copyright infringement. The suit was filed by IIFWA, a body of independent film-makers formed with the objective of “promoting, supporting and nurturing independent cinema by film-makers of Indian origin anywhere in the world”. The main defendant in the case was YouTube LLC, A Delaware Limited Liability Company operating from California and having corporate offices in Gurgaon and Mumbai. Google

Bombay HC Orders YouTube to Remove ‘IIFW Masterclass’ Episodes Read More »

Merck vs Glenmark: Speeding Up Trials and Injuncting Injunctions

/ By / Patent

Only a week or so ago, I wrote an op-ed in the Mint highlighting instances of “Jugaad Justice” from our courts. And one such instance turned on the maverick Justice Katju ordering that interim injunctions be dispensed with in complex IP cases. And that one move directly to the trial stage, albeit an expedited one. As I’d noted: “Years ago, in a rare flash of intuitive intelligence, the maverick justice Markandey Katju did away with “interim” injunctions, often the first phase of

Merck vs Glenmark: Speeding Up Trials and Injuncting Injunctions Read More »

‘Bombay Velvet’ and ‘Piku’ Secure Anti-Piracy Orders

/ By / Copyright

Yesterday, the Delhi High Court granted an ad-interim ex-parte injunction to Fox Star Studios India Ltd. and Phanton Films, the producers of the movie ‘Bombay Velvet’. The order which has not yet been uploaded on the website of the Delhi High Court, restrains named defendants and unknown parties (John Does) from “hosting, streaming, making available for viewing, downloading, providing access to… or sharing without authorisation on their website, in any manner, the film Bombay Velvet.” The order directs ISPs to

‘Bombay Velvet’ and ‘Piku’ Secure Anti-Piracy Orders Read More »

One, Two, Three…Out

/ By / Copyright, Privacy

The issue regarding liability of internet intermediaries has garnered much interest post Shreya Singhal v. Union of India. Under Indian law, the normal course of action to be followed by an intermediary when unlawful content (such as content violating copyright laws) has been posted online is to remove the impugned content from the website; in certain jurisdictions, in addition to “take-down provisions” we have what is known as the “three strikes” rule, a draconian legislation aimed at pressurizing Internet Service

One, Two, Three…Out Read More »

Scroll to Top