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 academia in India and Singapore. He is also co-author of the book Create, Copy, Disrupt: India's Intellectual Property Dilemmas (OUP).

Bayer sues Cipla for infringement of its Nexavar patent – C.S.(O.S.) No. 523 of 2010 before the High Court of Delhi


Bayer Corporation has recently launched Round II in its ‘epic’ battle against Cipla over the manufacture and sale of its patented drug ‘Nexavar’ (sorafenib), which has been approved to treat kidney and liver cancer. The Bayer has claimed that by launching a generic version of the drug, Cipla has infringed on its Indian patent no. 215758. Unfortunately the IPIRS system on the Patent Office website has failed to display any information on this patent. The first hearing of the present…


Read More »

To review or not to review: Can the Central Government review the grant of a patent under Section 66 of the Patent Act, 1970?


Admist the entire controversy of frivolous patents being granted to innovator companies the Controller General of Patents recently made the following statement to the press: “At the present law, there is no provision to review already granted patents by the patent office once the post-grant opposition period (one year after the grant) is over. But it can be revoked by moving the Intellectual Property Appellate Board or courts of law against the wrongly granted patents.Image from here. While this statement…


Read More »

SpicyIP Tidbits: OPPI responds to the IPA’s claims of frivolous patenting by its member companies


The Organization of Pharmaceutical Producers of India (OPPI), a consortium of ‘research based’ pharmaceutical companies has finally issued a statement in response to the plans of the Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance (IPA’s) to oppose the grant of several patents to innovator companies. In a statement to PTI, the OPPI President has pointed out that “There are examples wherein Indian pharmaceutical companies are applying for patents based on incremental innovations in third markets like the US and Europe.” Well, in that case…


Read More »
Biological Diversity

The National Biodiversity Authority to organize a National Consultation on proposed ‘Benefit Sharing Protocols’ & ‘Traditional Knowledge Rules’


In early February we had carried a post on a public notice put out by the National Biological Authority, inviting comments and pariticipation on the following items: (i)International Regime on Access and Benefit Sharing;(ii)Evolving sui generis system for the protection of Traditional Knowledge; &(iii)Amendments to the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 and Biological Diversity Rules, 2004. The Authority has now completed the process of receiving and collating the various responses that it received from interested stakeholders and academicians. The same have…


Read More »

Guest Post: The ‘Taxman’ imposes service tax on copyright licensing agreements


In a move that is bound to increase the cost of entertainment, Pranab da ‘Taxman‘ has proceeded to impose service tax on the licensing and assigning of copyright between two parties. Guest blogger, Ayan Roy Chowdhury ([email protected]), brings us an interesting piece on the law and its implications for the entertainment industry. We’ll hopefully bring you more such pieces on the subject of Tax & IP. The ‘Taxman‘ imposes service tax on copyright licensing agreementsbyAyan Roy ChowdhuryThe Union Budget has…


Read More »
Trademark

Guest Post: EU Court rules in favour of Google


I’m pleased to present to our readers a guest post by Avni Chari, a bright 3rd year student of NALSAR, on the recent judgment of the European Court of Justice in the case of Luois Vutton v. Google. This judgment has wide reaching ramifications for the world of online advertising as also the Google way of life. Sai had previously introduced the judgment over here. EU COURT RULES IN FAVOUR OF GOOGLEAvni S. Chari In a case of French luxury…


Read More »

The Great Indian Paradox – India preparing to challenge E.U. regulations at the WTO while also attempting to seal the Indo-E.U. FTA


Yet again, an anonymous official of our democratically elected government, has informed the ET that the Indian Government is ready to file a WTO complaint against the E.U. for the ‘seizure’ of transiting Indian drug consignments. Apparently talks with the E.U. over the issue have failed and the Indian Government is waiting for the Brazilians to get domestic clearance before both countries file a joint complaint against the E.U. In October, 2009 we had blogged on similar news reports which…


Read More »

SpicyIP Events: The 1st IJLT-CIS Annual Law Lecture Series


The Editorial Board of the Indian Journal of Law and Technology, Student Bar Association, The National Law School of India University (NLSIU) is organizing a lecture series along with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS). The theme for the Lecture Series is “Jurisdictional Issues in Cyberspace”. The Chief Guest for the Lecture Series is Hon’ble Dr. Justice S. Muralidhar (Judge, High Court of Delhi). Dr. Justice Muralidhar delivered the illuminating decision in the Banyan Tree case (Banyan Tree Holdings…


Read More »
Copyright

Guest Post: Waxing Lyrical on Royalties – An Analysis of the Author-Centric Amendments Proposed to the Indian Copyright Act


I’m pleased to bring to you yet another fascinating guest post from Nikhil Krishnamurthy, Senior Partner of Krishnamurthy & Co. on the proposed author-centric amendments proposed to the Copyright Act, 1957. To provide a very brief background to Nikhil’s post I refer you to one of our earlier posts outlining the clash between Aamir Khan and Javed Akhtar on the importance or lack therefore of lyricists to the sucess of a movie. WAXING LYRICAL ON ROYALTIES – AN ANALYSIS OF…


Read More »

Delhi High Court rules on ‘deemed abandonments’ by the Patent Office under Section 21


The Delhi High Court while disposing a writ petition in the recent case of Telefonaltiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Union of India once again reminded the Patent Office the true scope and impact of ‘deemed abandonments’ under Section 21 of the Patents Act, 1970. Section 21 of the Patents Act is a deeming provision which deems a patent application to be abandoned if in case a patent applicant does not respond to a Patent Office request within the prescribed time period….


Read More »