Prarthana Patnaik

Prarthana Patnaik is a final year law student at National Law University Odisha. Her main interests lie in copyright, open access and technology laws. She can be reached for queries and topic suggestions at [email protected]

Copyright

On How the Stairway to Heaven Dispute Dealt with Proof of Access and the Inverse Ratio Rule


Last week’s decision of the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to remand for a new trial in the famous Skidmore-Led Zeppelin dispute created quite a controversy. The litigation revolves around the popular Led Zeppelin rock song, Stairway to Heaven, which was allegedly copied from Taurus, a song written by the Spirit band member, Randy Wolfe. The lawsuit was brought by Michael Skidmore (trustee of Wolfe’s Trust), claiming that “Led Zeppelin needs to do the right thing and give credit where credit…


Read More »
Trademark

SC on Passing Off and Delays


In a recent decision, Wockhardt Limited vs. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., a 2-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court clarified certain important principles of passing off of trademarks and delays and acquiescence.  Factual and Procedural Background Pharmaceutical company, Torrent (“Plaintiff/ Respondent”) owns branded drugs named “CHYMORAL” and “CHYMORAL FORTE”. These drugs are used to alleviate swellings and wounds which may occur post-surgery. Rival company, Wockhardt, (“Defendant/Appellant”) started selling products under the name of “CHYMTRAL FORTE”, thereby merely substituting the letter ‘T’ with…


Read More »
Others

SpicyIP Fortnightly Review (September 17-30)


I had written a post on the latest Mahindra-Fiat dispute. The US International Trade Commission has instituted an investigation under Section 337 of the Tariff Act against Mahindra on the basis of Fiat’s complaint. Fiat alleges that its trademark in the grills of the “Jeep” has been infringed by Mahindra’s “ROXOR”. In my post, I briefly summarise similar disputes which have occurred in the past between Fiat and its rival companies (including Mahindra) and reflect upon Fiat’s “protectiveness” about its grills….


Read More »
Trademark Unfair Competition

Mahindra Embroiled in Another “Fiat”-sco!


A long-standing rivalry between Mahindra and Mahindra and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles took a new turn on 11th September 2018, when the US International Trade Commission (“USITC”) [the US federal agency which investigates matters of trade and interrelated IP infringement issues] instituted an investigation based on a complaint made by Fiat. In its complaint, Fiat makes allegations of trade dress, trademark infringement and unfair competition under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 against Mahindra for “sale of certain motorized vehicles and components”. Section 377 provides…


Read More »
Patent

Bombay HC Addresses Ambiguity in the Patent Agent Examination


The Bombay HC recently delivered an order dealing with certain objections raised against the Patent Agent Examination, 2016. In their decision, they interpreted the Supreme Court’s decision in Kanpur University v. Samir Gupta (“Kanpur University”). This post examines the questions which arise due to the Court’s interpretation and application of this decision. The Question in Issue The Petitioner (a candidate who appeared for the said Examination) raised contentions regarding the answer options of a multiple choice question in the Examination…


Read More »
Others

SpicyIP Weekly Review (September 3-9)


Thematic Highlight  In Prashant’s latest update on the bedaquiline  controversy, he discusses about how The Hindu’s science editor pitched for increasing access to bedaquiline to treat MDR-TB. In response to this, he reiterates his argument in earlier posts: Since Phase III trials for the drug has not been conducted yet, regulatory approval for the same should not be given. In the latter part of his post, he points out that journalists have not addressed the government’s scandalous consent forms for providing…


Read More »
Copyright Overlaps in IP Patent Trademark

Obscenity and Morality under IP Law


  Obscenity under  the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”) is a relic of India’s colonial past. Though the need for such a provision is often subject to debate, it is indisputable that the judiciary’s interpretation of this provision has been often been anachronistic in past instances. The judiciary has, no doubt, evolved from the infamous Hicklin Test (tendency of the impugned material to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences) to the contemporary community standards (testing the impugned material against contemporary…


Read More »
Others

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 20-26)


Thematic Highlight This week’s thematic highlight was brought forth by our fellowship applicant, Arth Nagpal. In his submission, he compares ISP liability on parties for copyright infringement in USA and India. He examines the problem of John Doe orders in India and highlights the necessity of reforming the Indian Copyright Act for introducing ISP liability in India. Topical Highlight Sreyoshi wrote a post on a Madras High Court judgment which analysed the issue of whether there had been infringement of copyright…


Read More »
Others

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 6-12)


Thematic Highlight Prashant wrote a special report on certain regulatory restrictions passed by the Ministry of Heath and Family Welfare; the Ministry announced that the Karnataka Antibiotics and Pharmaceuticals Ltd.(a PSU) would be the sole authority for manufacture and supply of the pregnancy drug, oxytocin. In his report, he examines a Himachal Pradesh HC judgment which suggested the need to restrict manufacture of oxytocin to the public sector and claimed that adverse effects were caused by oxytocin. He also examines…


Read More »
Competition Law

Star India and Sony in Troubled Waters over CCI Order


[Warning: Long post follows!] The CCI, in a recent order dated 27th July, 2018, passed under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002 (“the Act”), instructed the Director General to investigate claims of price discrimination made by the Informant, Noida Software Technology Park Limited (“NSTPL”) against Star India Pvt. Ltd. (“Star India”), Sony Pictures Network India Pvt. Ltd. (“Sony”) and Indian Broadcasting Foundation (“IBF”). Factual Overview NSTPL is a distributor of TV content and it uses the new Head-end in…


Read More »