Prashant Reddy

Prashant Reddy

T. Prashant Reddy graduated from the National Law School of India University, Bangalore, with a B.A.LLB (Hons.) degree in 2008. He later graduated with a LLM degree (Law, Science & Technology) from the Stanford Law School in 2013. Prashant has worked with law firms in Delhi and in Indian academia. He is currently a Research Associate at Applied Research Centre for Intellectual Assets and the Law in Asia (ARCIALA), Singapore Management University.

Copyright Others Patent Trademark

Madras Bar Association challenges the constitutionality of the Finance Act, 2017 and the new tribunal rules


As recently reported by Bar & Bench, the Madras Bar Association has filed a petition before the Madras High Court challenging the constitutionality of Sections 156 to 189 of the Finance Act, 2017 as also the Tribunal, Appellate and other Authorities (Qualifications, Experience and other conditions of Service of Members) Rules, 2017 that I had written about over here. A bench of the Madras High Court headed by Chief Justice Indira Banerjee has issued notice to the government asking it to…


Read More »
Copyright Others Patent Trademark

Government of India launches ‘Occupy the tribunals’ movement with new rules on appointments and removals of judges of the IPAB & 18 other tribunals


On June 1, 2017 the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance notified in the Gazette of India, the Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal and other Authorities (Qualifications, Experience and other Conditions of Service of Members) Rules, 2017. These rules were notified under Section 184 of the Finance Act, 2017. It is usually the practice of the Central Government to publish a draft of statutory rules in the Gazette and invite comments from the public before notifying such rules into the law. However…


Read More »
Privacy

The Whatsapp Privacy PIL: Did Facebook shoot Whatsapp in its foot?


A few months ago, I had written about a judgment of the Delhi High Court dismissing a PIL filed against the change in Whatsapp privacy policy. As I had commented at this time, the PIL was absolutely frivolous and should have been dismissed. Yet, it is now being heard by a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court – a rare event these days. How did this PIL transform from being frivolous to ending up before a Constitutional Bench of 5…


Read More »
Patent

143 patent infringement lawsuits between 2005 and 2015: Only 5 judgments


Sometime ago, Aparajita and I embarked on an empirical study on the issue of Indian patent litigation. Although the paper was never written, Aparajita did dig out some very interesting statistics on the filing and pendency of patent infringement lawsuits before 5 High Courts at Bombay, Delhi, Madras, Calcutta and Gujarat for the period of 2005 to 2015 i.e. the first decade of TRIPS. As most of you may know compiling litigation data in India is quite the nightmare because…


Read More »
Patent Plant Variety Protection

Intervention by Addl. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta in Monsanto-Nuziveedu appeal raises questions of propriety


Vivian Fernandes of Smart Agriculture has brought to light a recent development in the ongoing litigation between Monsanto and Nuziveedu. As we reported earlier, Monsanto sued Nuziveedu for patent and trademark infringement before the Delhi High Court. A Single Judge of the high Court declined to grant an interim injunction and the matter was appealed to a Division Bench of the High Court. As per Fernandes, during the hearings, the Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta “wanted to make a voluminous…


Read More »
Patent

The (un)patentability of microbiological processes – A drafting error or considered policy?


While researching for a paper that I am currently writing, I stumbled along a rather strange issue regarding the patentability of microbiological processes. The root of the issue traces back to Article 27.3 of TRIPS. This provision allows member-states to exclude from patentability certain subject matter such as plants, animals and essentially biological processes, with the caveat that member-states will still have to protect micro-organisms and microbiological processes under their national patent laws. The relevant wording of Article 27.3 reads…


Read More »
Innovation Patent

DIPP forgets about NIIPM & Indian law firms, signs deal with WIPO


Earlier this month, the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) announced that it had signed a deal with the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) to establish Technology and Innovation Support Centres (TISC) in India. According to the press release put out by the DIPP, the TISCs are meant to provide innovators in developing countries with high quality technology, information and related services to help them create, protect and manage their intellectual property. As per the same press release, once…


Read More »
Designs

Carlsberg v. Som Distilleries: Beer meets design law in an interesting judgment


In a judgment running into 119 pages, Justice Vipin Sanghi of the Delhi High Court has declined to grant Carlsberg an interim injunction in a composite lawsuit filed for design infringement and passing off against Som Distilleries, the manufacturers of ‘Hunter’ beer. The winning side was represented by Senior Advocate Pratibha Singh, briefed by Kapil Wadhwa. Apart from denying an interim injunction, Justice Sanghi has referred a question of law to the Chief Justice on the grounds that the judgment…


Read More »
Others

Appointments and Independence of the IPAB after the Finance Act, 2017


While the Commerce Minister Nirmala Sitharaman waxes eloquent about the government’s aim to have an efficient IP policy, the reality of the non-functioning Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) indicates that this government is no different from the previous UPA Government. The IPAB which hears appeals against the Intellectual Property Office, as also original revocation and rectification petitions against registered trademarks and patents, has been headless for over a year now after the last Chairperson retired. This problem has occurred several…


Read More »
Trademark

The ‘Well Known’ Trademark under the New Trade Mark Rules, 2017: Is the New Procedure Constitutional?


The new Trade Mark Rules, 2017 recently notified and discussed over here on SpicyIP, have generated a lot of buzz for creating a new procedure that allows the Registrar to declare trademarks as ‘well known’. The new Rule 124 allows any trade mark owner to file a request in Form TM-M requesting the Registrar to declare a trademark ‘well-known’. As most of our readers may know, the ‘well-known’ tag is the ‘holy grail’ for trademark owners – everybody wants it…


Read More »