Others

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 13-19)


This week started with Prashant’s post about the numerous judgements of the Delhi High Court which have continued to apply the overruled judgement in Time Incorporated v. Lokesh Srivastava, relating to the grant of punitive damages in IPR cases. The cases show a disturbing misstep in the court’s refusing to follow the rule of stare decisis on the binding nature of the judgements of larger benches of the court.

The next post was Harshvardhan’s exposition on trademark bullying, in the context of the dispute between eBay and naturebay. The post breaks down how large corporates in the marketplace tend to manipulate smaller businesses and force them into giving up their trademarks or domain names.

Pankhuri also informed readers about the workshop on Standard Essential Patents in the hi-tech world, conducted by the Centre for Innovation, Intellectual Property, and Competition (CIIPC) at National Law University, Delhi by Prof. Jay Kesan and Dr Kirti Gupta.

Next was Balu’s post about the decision of the Delhi High Court, imposing costs upon Nitish Kumar in a copyright infringement suit filed against him and other defendants. The costs were imposed as the court felt that the application filed by Nitish Kumar, to have his name removed as a defendant, was filed frivolously and without merit, only to prolong the case.

We also had two fantastic guest posts this week. The first was by Mr. Jaideep Reddy, an associate at Nishith Desai Associates, in relation to the Supreme Court’s consideration on privacy as a fundamental right. The post argues that the Supreme Court should recognize privacy interests in different fundamental rights, particularly under Articles 19 and 21 of the constitution, and thatthe decision is an opportunity for the court to build jurisprudence on privacy in light of emerging technologies and challenges.

The second guest post was by Ms. Latha R. Nair, a partner at K&S Partners. Ms. Nair wrote on the application by Missionaries of Charity for granting trademark protection to the typical blue and white design used by them, which Mathews had earlier reported on, here. After presenting a history of the trademark, the post examines the importance of trademarks for charitable organizations and argues that the blue and white mark should be granted to the Missionaries of Charity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.