Category Archives: Patent

Copyright Geographical Indication Patent Plant Variety Protection Trademark

Justice Manmohan Singh Holds Hearings at IPAB Despite Supreme Court Ruling

by
2 Comments

Heard it through the grapevine and saw in the causelist that Retd. Justice Manmohan Singh is still holding hearings in the IPAB and passing orders. Just a couple of days ago we reported that the application for Justice Singh’s extension as the IPAB Chairperson was rejected by the Supreme Court. The Court in its judgement (pdf) expressly noted that the tenure of the incumbent Chairperson ended on 21.09.2019 and further rejected the notion that the incumbent must remain as the…


Read More »
Patent

The Amended Form 27 and Uncertainty in Timelines for Filing

by
1 Comment

We have received a lead from one of our readers on an issue regarding the filing of working statements (Form 27) as per the amendments made to Patent Rules, 2003 in October last year. The Patent Rules, 2003 require patentees as well as patent licensees to file a statement disclosing information regarding the extent to which the patented invention has been worked in India on a commercial scale. The format for this statement is Form 27, provided in the Second…


Read More »
Copyright Others Patent Trademark

SpicyIP Weekly Review (February 8-14)

by
Leave a Comment

Topical Highlight Breaking: Supreme Court Dismisses Application Seeking Extension of Justice Manmohan Singh as IPAB Chairperson Praharsh informed our readers that this week the Supreme Court dismissed the AIPPI application seeking another extension to the tenure of the incumbent IPAB Chairperson. The application for extension was a part of a writ petition which was disposed of by the court after tagging it to Madras High Court Bar Association decision. Praharsh highlights the issues taken up by the court – the laws regarding…


Read More »
Copyright Geographical Indication Patent Plant Variety Protection Trademark

Breaking: Finance Minister Proposes a Draft Bill in Lok Sabha to Shut Down IPAB

by
5 Comments

Just hours ago we broke the story about the Supreme Court judgement (pdf) dismissing the application seeking extension of the incumbent IPAB Chairperson and now we are in knowledge of an immensely interesting Draft Bill (pdf) introduced in the Lok Sabha which proposes to shut IPAB for good! The Bill was introduced the day before yesterday (11.02.2021) by the Union Finance Minister Ms. Nirmala Sitharaman, bearing the title “The Tribunals Reforms (Rationalisation And Conditions Of Service) Bill, 2021”. While seeking…


Read More »
Copyright Geographical Indication Patent Plant Variety Protection Trade Secret Trademark

Breaking: Supreme Court Dismisses Application Seeking Extension of Justice Manmohan Singh as IPAB Chairperson

by
2 Comments

Hitting the (seemingly) final nail and ending the trail of extension requests, the Supreme Court via its order yesterday (12/02/2021 (pdf) ) dismissed the application seeking another extension to the tenure of the incumbent IPAB Chairperson. The application for extension was filed by the AIPPI (aka the International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property) and was a part of a writ petition which was disposed of by the court after tagging it to Madras High Court Bar Association decision….


Read More »
Copyright Others Patent Trademark

SpicyIP Weekly Review (February 1-7)

by
Leave a Comment

Thematic Highlight An Alternative to Delhi HC’s Approach on Confidentiality Clubs in InterDigital-Xiaomi SEP Dispute In this guest post, Abhilasha analyses the recent Delhi High Court decision on confidentiality clubs in InterDigital v. Xiaomi. She first lays down the background in which confidentiality clubs have originated in the Indian IP litigation. She particularly emphasises on the balancing of interests carried out by Delhi High Court in the Vestergaard judgment while creating a confidentiality club. She then analyses the decision in…


Read More »
Patent

An Alternative to Delhi HC’s Approach on Confidentiality Clubs in InterDigital-Xiaomi SEP Dispute

by
4 Comments

We’re pleased to bring to you a guest post by Abhilasha Nautiyal, analysing the recent Delhi High Court decision on confidentiality clubs in InterDigital v. Xiaomi (also discussed by Nikhil and Anupriya earlier here, here and here) and proposing an alternative to it. Abhilasha is an attorney at Ira Law, a firm that she co-founded with other colleagues. Prior to this, she was a partner at an IP law firm. She graduated from the Army Institute of Law and then…


Read More »
Copyright Design Patent Trademark

SpicyIP Weekly Review (January 25 – 31)

by
Leave a Comment

Topical Highlight The Delhi High Court Judgement in the IPRS Case (2021) In this post, Adarsh Ramanujan analyses the Delhi High Court’s recent judgment in IPRS v. Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. The judgment has been appealed, and the Division Bench has issued notice in the matter, with the interim direction that the judgment from the Single Judge will not be treated as a precedent in other proceedings. Adarsh points to the Court’s finding that IPRS took self-contradictory legal positions in the two suits considered in the…


Read More »
Comparative Advertising Copyright Geographical Indication Patent

SpicyIP Fortnightly Review (January 11-24)

by
Leave a Comment

Topical Highlight Delhi HC Order Cripples Authors’ Royalty Rights in Underlying Works I critiqued the Delhi High Court’s order in IPRS v. ENIL, which held that underlying works incorporated in sound recordings are not utilized and do not incur royalty when the sound recording is used. I briefly review how the 2012 Amendment was brought in to recognise authors of underlying works’ inalienable right to royalty. In this order, the court has accepted the argument that it is the producer…


Read More »
Patent

Delhi High Court Interprets ‘Export’ as ‘Use’ in India; Grants Interim Injunction to Lundbeck

by
10 Comments

The Delhi High Court passed an order last month in the matter of H Lundbeck A/S v. Hetro Drugs Ltd., whereby it ruled that “export of the products from India would amount to use of the product in India” under Section 107 of the Patents Act. While according this meaning to the term ‘export’, the court however, did not elucidate on the reasoning for its interpretation. The present post will discuss why the present ruling is inconsistent with the nature of…


Read More »
  1. Pages:
  3. 1
  4. ...
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. ...
  15. 136