Our Highlight of the Week is Shamnad Sir’s post on IP ‘expert’ courts. He draws on fascinating quotes from Judge Rifkind from 50 years ago, and also discusses the more recent critiques of Justice Diane Wood. He concludes by setting the perfect stage for more debate on the extent to which the Commercial Courts Act’s expert courts will help or hinder the ‘efficient’ and ‘fair’ dispensation of IP justice.
Our first post this week was a Guest Post by Rahul Bajaj for the SpicyIP Fellowship series, where he analyses the Marrakesh Treaty’s journey so far. He discusses the importance of the Treaty, and then moves on to the reasons States have for being unwilling to ratify the Treaty. He concludes by noting that this is the best time for governments to take positive steps in enforcing the Treaty.
This was followed by my post on the Supreme Court’s recent judgment on the Jagatjit Industries v. IPAB case. The issues in this case were centred on Form TM-44 and S. 125, and the case presents fascinating developments in the jurisprudence on the powers of the Trademark Registrar’s office.
Our fourth and final post this week was Rupali’s post regarding the SC admitting an SLP against Delhi HC’s decision in Roche v. Cipla. She discusses the multiple judgments the case has had till now, noting that the reasoning in the Division Bench’s judgment is well developed and hard to dispute. She notes, though, that the plagiarism scandal might bolster Cipla’s case.
- China’s patent office invalidated Novartis’ patent on Gleevec.
- There were some very fascinating amendments to the American Defend Trade Secrets Act.
- Due to concerns with regards to ethics in IP scholarship, the IPKat reports that a number of voices in the IP community haves signed on to the ‘Open Letter on Ethical Norms in Intellectual Property Scholarship’.