Aparajita Lath

Aparajita graduated from the National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata where she was on the Board of Editors of the NUJS Law Review. She has worked at AZB & Partners and Trilegal. She is currently pursuing her LL.M at Harvard Law School and is a Student Fellow at the Petrie-Flom Centre.

Others

Algorithmic Transparency and the Smart State


While the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) released its much-awaited report on a sparkling new data protection legislation late last year, as reported, the bill may be scrapped for a completely new law. The personal data protection bill had created significant buzz in the industry and society. So much so, the JPC received feedback from over 200 stakeholders representing a cross-section of society. After years of consultations from 2018 onwards, the bill transformed from a ‘Personal Data Protection Bill’ to a…


Read More »
Trademark

The Trade Marks Registry Proposing to Restrict Access to Documents


The Trade Marks Registry (TMR) issued a public notice requesting suggestions from stakeholders regarding the display and availability of documents on its official website (comments are to be submitted by September 30, 2019). It appears that the TMR has received representations from stakeholders raising concerns regarding the display of confidential information, proprietary information and personal information on its website. The TMR is now proposing to classify documents into two categories on its website: One category that will consist of documents…


Read More »
Trademark

Websites, the Virtual Juggernauts, Continue to Question Jurisdiction and Enforcement in Online Trademark Disputes


The borderless nature of the internet has, time and again, challenged conventional notions of jurisdiction and enforcement. While countries have a legitimate interest in protecting / preserving their laws, with the internet, there is always a fear of the law becoming a general law of the internet. Maintaining this balance is key when deciding questions that pertain to issues involving parties belonging to different jurisdictions. The Delhi High Court was tasked with resolving a trademark infringement and passing off dispute…


Read More »
Patent Trademark

Technology Has the Potential to Make Trademark Processes Easy Peasy


Singapore’s New Trademark App The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore has recently launched an app called ‘IPOS GO’ available on the Apple App Store and the Google Play Store. The app provides various on-the-go trademark services, which include even direct filing of trademark applications (making this the world’s first mobile app for enabling the filing of trademark applications).  The various functions that the app can perform are: “Use IPOS Go to: Apply for and renew trademark registrations in Singapore* Search…


Read More »
Competition Law Data Exclusivity Overlaps in IP Patent

Shogun Organics: Burden of Proof and Follow On Registrations


Shogun Organics Limited v. Gauri Hari and Others is a curious case concerning burden of proof and an apparent conflict between the Patents Act, 1970 and the Insecticides Act, 1968. Facts Shogun Organics Limited (plaintiff) filed a suit seeking a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from infringing its process patent. The patent relates to the manufacturing of d-trans Allethrin (an active ingredient in mosquito repellants). Shogun had also obtained an ‘original’ registration for the manufacture of this product under the…


Read More »
Patent Trademark

Public petition: Easing TMR/IPO e-filings


[This post has been co-authored with Shamnad Basheer] A friend of the blog is keen on unleashing an innovative online interface to ease e-filings of trademark (TM) applications and other TM forms. While a trademark registration regime brings with it various perceived advantages, the regime also brings in various administrative requirements that are needed to ensure that the Trade Marks Register is always upto date. A significant part of a client/trademark agent’s time is spent in ensuring that applications, replies,…


Read More »
Patent

Karnataka High Court: Appeal on Bt cotton price control


As readers may already be aware, Monsanto owns a patent for a synthesised genetic sequence of select genes of Bacillus thuringiensis which when inserted into cotton seeds renders the seeds immune to bollworms and consequentially assists in increasing cotton yield. Monsanto injects seeds with its Bt technology and Indian seed companies enter into licensing agreements by which they pay a trait value (license fee) to Monsanto for using its technology. Monsanto has been accused of overcharging which has lead to…


Read More »
Design Trademark

Its all about the shape – design infringement and passing off


Just like other aspects of civilisation and life, shapes too had humble beginnings. The clean and simple – circles, squares and triangles, the most basic shapes of our planet, laid the foundation for today’s complicated designs and patterns. Also, as we have heard, shapes were used to communicate and as part of a language in early civilisation. While shapes today have evolved and become more numerous and complicated, they are still a language in themselves and are certainly still a…


Read More »
Patent

An unclear precedent : Accept the offer to surrender or revoke the patent? (IPAB order 29 of 2016)


Sribindu Chivukula recently wrote a post for us on the IPAB order relating to revocation proceedings where an offer to surrender the patent was also previously made. Sribindu concluded that “While the Act does not categorically state/forbid patentee from surrendering a patent through opposition/revocation proceedings, the IPAB’s ruling in the present case clearly established that a surrender is possible only when there are no proceedings pending with respect to the patent. If, however, any such proceedings are pending at the…


Read More »
Copyright

Is Prasar Bharati having the cake and eating it too: Star Sports v. Prasar Bharati (Supreme Court)


(This post has been co-authored with Prashant Reddy) The Supreme Court ruled that broadcasters broadcasting sporting events of national importance must provide ‘clean’ feeds to Prasar Bharati. The issue in this case revolved around interpreting Section 3 of the Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007 (“Act”) and Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Rules, 2007 (“Rules”). The purpose of the Act is to ensure access to a larger audience of listeners/viewers of sporting events…


Read More »