Divij Joshi

Divij Joshi is a lawyer and tinkers in technology and policy. He tweets @divij_joshi.

Copyright

A Draft Amendment to the Cinematograph Act could Put You In Jail the Next Time You Record an End-Credits Scene in a Movie Hall

by
Leave a Comment

The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting recently published a draft amendment to the Indian Cinematograph Act of 1952, with the stated aim of countering film piracy. The draft amendment, to Section 7(4) of the Cinematograph Act reads – “Notwithstanding any law for the time being in force including any provision of the Copyright Act, 1957, any person who, during the exhibition of an audiovisual work, cinematographic in an exhibition facility used to exhibit cinematograph   films   or   audiovisual   recordings   and   without  …


Read More »
Trademark

Delhi High Court Examines Intermediary Liability for Trademark Infringement (Part – II)

by
Leave a Comment

In my previous post, I broke down Ms. Justice Prathiba Singh’s recent judgement in Christian Louboutin v Nakul Bajaj, and noted its importance for intermediary liability and e-commerce players in India. In this post, I examine the Court’s approach towards intermediary liability, and attempt to outline what exactly the judgement means for e-commerce platforms. (Update: On November 12, the Court also made a similar ruling on similar facts in L’oreal v Brandworld, relying upon its earlier judgement in Christian Louboutin.)…


Read More »
Trademark

Delhi High Court Examines Intermediary Liability for Trademark Infringement (Part – I)

by
Leave a Comment

In a significant judgement for e-commerce in India, the Delhi High Court in Christian Louboutin SAS v Nakul Bajaj and Ors., (decided on November 2), has recently attempted to clarify the responsibilities and liability of online intermediaries for trademark infringement. The judgement both clarifies and in some part obfuscates India’s intermediary liability regime as it relates to trademark infringement. Ms. Justice Prathiba Singh’s judgement is particularly important considering it is the first time the issue of trademark infringement by online…


Read More »
Overlaps in IP Patent

India’s IPR Regime Looks to Hi-Tech to Improve Administration – From Video Conferencing to AI and Blockchain

by
Leave a Comment

The IPR administrative offices form the backbone of the legal system of India’s IP regimes. The efficacy of the law depends, to a large extent, on how these offices manage their administrative tasks, which includes substantive evaluation of claims over IP, as well as tasks of effectively maintaining registries and public records. We have written, in the past, about many worrying aspects of their administration, such as non-transparent functioning of the Copyright Office, or the skewed incentives system within the…


Read More »
Others

SpicyIP Interview Series – Carl Malamud on Gandhi, Satyagraha and Open Access in India

by
Leave a Comment

On the occasion of Mahatma Gandhi’s 149th birth anniversary, we at SpicyIP celebrate by bringing you a conversation with Mr. Carl Malamud – pioneering web archivist, open access advocate, the founder of PublicResource.org and a satyagrahi on a mission to free knowledge from the restraints imposed by archaic laws, institutions and values. Mr. Malamud has been at the forefront of the fight for better access to public knowledge – having taken on (and won against) various US Government agencies like…


Read More »
Trademark

“Drugs Are Not Sweets” – Bombay HC Imposes Exemplary Costs for Pharma Trademark Infringement

by
Leave a Comment

In Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. Curetech Skincare and Anr., Mr. Justice Kathawalla of the Bombay High Court imposed costs of 1.5 crores against the defendant found to be ‘habitually’ committing trademark infringement of pharmaceutical products. The decision is significant for the quantum of damages awarded and the reasoning (or lack thereof) behind the award of exemplary costs. Brief Background The dispute concerns Mumbai-based generics manufacturer Glenmark, and its product Candid – B (an anti-fungal cream). The principal defendant is Galpha…


Read More »
Copyright

SpicyIP Tidbit: Madras HC Upholds Copyright Claim on Film Title

by
2 Comments

Things tend to go sour when nobody watches the watchdog. This seems to be particularly true of our hon’ble courts when they act in ex parte or undefended suits. In the latest development on this front, the Madras HC, in M/s. Sathya Movies vs M/s.Suresh Production Entertainment Private Limited, has upheld the Plaintiff’s claim that it was entitled to the protection of its film title, ‘Naan Aanaiittaal’, which was registered with the Tamil Film Producers Council. Mr. Justice C. V….


Read More »
Patent

Philips SEP Judgement: India’s First Post-Trial SEP Judgement has Serious Flaws

by
Leave a Comment

Earlier, we covered Ms. Justice Mukta Gupta’s decision in Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. vs. Rajesh Bansal And Ors. where the Delhi High Court found certain local manufacturers of DVD players liable for infringing Philip’s patents, which it claimed were Standard Essential Patents. I pointed out that the judgement was flawed on several counts. Given the importance of the jurisprudence on SEPs, the Court’s judgement requires some deeper examination. ‘Essentiality’ and the (Absent) Claim Construction In determining infringement, the plaintiff adopted…


Read More »
Drug Regulation Patent

Pharma Update: Russia Grants First Compulsory License for Anti-Myeloma Drug Revlemid, As German Supreme Court Upholds CL for HIV Drug Isentress

by
Leave a Comment

In moves that should have significant global impact on public health, an Arbitration Court in Moscow, Russia, granted Russia’s first Compulsory License for Lenalidomide (trade name Revlemid). In a similar development this month, the German Federal Supreme Court upheld a preliminary Compulsory License granted by a lower court for the HIV drug Isentress. The Russian License Unlike in India, the Russian judiciary has the exclusive authority to issue compulsory licenses. The CL is an outcome of the suit filed in…


Read More »
Patent

Breaking: In India’s First Post-Trial Standard Essential Patent Judgement, Delhi High Court Finds Local Manufacturers Infringed Philips’ DVD SEP

by
Leave a Comment

Almost a year after it was reserved by the Delhi High Court, the first post-trial judgement by an Indian Court in a Standard Essential Patent-related suit was issued on July 12, 2018. In Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. vs. Rajesh Bansal And Ors., Ms. Justice Mukta Gupta delivered a positive finding of the ‘essentiality’ of Philips’ patent, and held that the defendants, local manufacturers, in manufacturing standard-compliant DVD players were infringing this patent. Background Plaintiff, in 1995, registered Patent No. 184753…


Read More »
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7