Adarsh Ramanujan

Adarsh Ramanujan

Adarsh is an independent counsel with offices in Delhi and Chennai. Before starting his own practice he spent considerable time with Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan at their New Delhi and Geneva offices. He obtained his B.Sc. LL.B. (Hons.) degree (Gold Medalist) from National Law University, Jodhpur and LL.M. degree from University of California, Berkeley. He is a qualified Patent Agent in India. A major portion of his time is spent practicing in the areas of IP & Technology Laws as well as in International Trade Law. He has however branched out into doing commercial litigation and arbitration work. His expertise also extends to regulatory laws such as environmental laws, biodiversity laws and cyber laws. Adarsh has taught patent law in NLU, Delhi, NLU, Jodhpur and at the CEIPI Institute (University of Strasbourg). He has authored or co-authored close to 30 publications on diverse topics, including on IP, WTO, constitutional law and international tax.

Patent

U.K. Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling on SEPs: An Imperfect Solution, But Is There a Perfect One? (Part II)


[Disclosure: I represent/have represented clients on related and unrelated issues. Views expressed here are personal.] In Part I, I had summarised the U.K. Supreme Court’s ruling in the Unwired case. In this Part II, I share my critique of the judgement. While I have several comments, I have restricted myself to the principal ones for the present platform. Must a FRAND license always be global? At 1st glance, the U.K. Supreme Court’s judgment suggests that a FRAND license must always…


Read More »
Patent

U.K. Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling on SEPs: An Imperfect Solution, But Is There a Perfect One? (Part I)


[Disclosure: I represent/have represented clients on related and unrelated issues. Views expressed here are personal.] In a recent landmark ruling, the U.K. Supreme Court (here) dismissed the appeals filed by implementers of technical standards, i.e. Huawei, ZTE, against standard essential patent (SEP) holders, i.e. Unwired and Conversant.  This is a well-known dispute and has previously been covered by this blog here, here, and briefly touched upon here. In this Part I, I will focus on summarising the ruling, reserving my…


Read More »
Patent

Yves Choueifaty v. Attorney General of Canada: An Interesting Development from Canada on Claim Construction and Patent Office Manuals


This time, I want to discuss recent judgement from the Federal Court of Canada – Yves Choueifaty v. Attorney General of Canada, 2020 FC 837 – available here. I found it interesting because it concerned the patentability of computer-related inventions (CRI) and addressed a situation where the Court found the Patent Office Manual to be erroneous. The case concerned the invention that claimed a computer-implemented method concerning investment portfolios. An in-depth assessment of the claims or the technology at hand…


Read More »
Trademark

Of Paper Tigers and English: WTO Appellate Body Report in Tobacco Plain Packaging Dispute


As a law school student, I once heard an accomplished practitioner of international law stating that “International law is English”. The WTO Appellate Body’s Report in the tobacco plain packaging dispute issued in June this year proves something more than this statement: “International law is convoluted English”. I had previously written about the WTO Panel Report in this dispute (or set of disputes), which are available here and here. Background To recollect, this set of disputes concerned Australia’s legislative measures…


Read More »
Patent

SpicyIP Tidbit : EBA’s Recent Ruling on Patentability of Plants and Animals : Any Impact on India?


[Disclaimer: I represent clients in India in ongoing litigation on related and unrelated issues. Views expressed here are strictly personal.] The IPKat recently reported that the Enlarged Board of Appeal operating under the EPC regime handed down its ruling in G 3/19 on the patentability of plants and animals developed from essentially biological processes. The Enlarged Board of Appeals has approved the Rule 28(2) recently inserted in Implementing Regulations of the European Patent Convention, by which products exclusively obtained by…


Read More »
Copyright

US Supreme Court Upholds States’ Immunity from Copyright Infringement Suits : Is US in Violation of the TRIPS Agreement?


Last month, the US Supreme Court issued its judgement in an interesting case involving sovereign immunity for copyright infringement. This was the case of Frederick L Allen v. Roy A. Cooper, III, Gov of North Carolina et al. The copyrighted work in question involved the videos and photos taken by the plaintiff concerning the shipwreck of the Queen Anne’s revenge. The plaintiffs sued the State of North Carolina when it published some of these videos and photos online and the…


Read More »
Innovation Patent

Patent Statistics: A Clue towards the Underlying ‘Momentum’ and ‘Acceleration’


Many may have followed the press release by the WIPO earlier this month declaring that in 2019 China had surpassed the United States to become the largest filer of international patent applications for the first time. That is, number of the PCT applications originating from China is the largest in the world as on 2019. PCT applications originating from China were 58,990, which represents a 11% growth from the previous year and almost 2400% increase from 2005. The number of…


Read More »
Drug Regulation Patent

Delhi HC Allows Genentech’s Internal Expert to Inspect Reliance’s Documents in Trastuzumab Suit: Dilution of Confidentiality Club?


On 2nd March, a Single Judge of the Delhi High Court in the case of Genentech Inc. and Ors. v. Drugs Controller General of India and Ors. passed an order, which effectively allowed Genentech’s in-house employee/expert to inspect the documents placed on record under a Confidentiality Club. This is the Trastuzumab litigation involving Reliance. This litigation saga has been covered on several occasions including here, here, here, here, here and here. When I first heard of this order, I was…


Read More »
Copyright

Copyright of Music Composers, Lyricists and Performers: Another Missed Opportunity by Mad HC in the Illayaraja Cases – Part II


In Part I of this two-part post, I had analysed the latest judgments of the Madras High Court in Ilaiyaraja (II) and Ilaiyaraja (I), in that order. I had concluded that the Madras High Court in Ilaiyaraja (II) got it right whereas it got it wrong in Ilaiyaraja (I) even though the conclusions are same in both the judgments. This is not a contradiction because the law applicable to the facts in both cases is totally different. In Ilaiyaraja (II),…


Read More »
Copyright

Copyright of Music Composers, Lyricists and Performers: Another Missed Opportunity by Mad HC in the Illayaraja Cases – Part I


On February 13th, the Madras High Court passed a judgement in the case of M/s. Indian Record Manufacturing Company Limited v. AGI Music Sdn Bhd and Ors., wherein the music composer, Ilaiyaraja, was Defendant no. 2 (“Ilaiyaraja (II)”). The suit was decreed with costs and the defendants, including Ilaiyaraja, and agents etc. were permanently restrained from infringing the Plaintiff’s copyright over certain specifically identified musical works/sound recordings. This is the second judgment concerning Ilaiyaraja, the first being the judgment in…


Read More »