The ‘Indian Express’ trademark infringement conundrum

/ By / Trademark

This post summarizes a recent case decided by Justice Gautam Patel of the Bombay HC, where the question of whether the use of a title registered only with the Registrar of Newspapers for India (RNI) under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 (the ‘Press Act’) can amount to infringement of an identical title registered under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, was tackled. The Court, ruling in favour of the plantiffs, held that the mark had been infringed, and restrained the defendant from using the […]

The ‘Indian Express’ trademark infringement conundrum Read More »

Form 27 and Draft Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2015

/ By / Innovation, Patent

Introduction I had earlier covered Shamnad Basheer v. Union of India where the petitioner highlighted the failure to enforce statutory provisions relating to the disclosure as to how patentees have worked their inventions. This is a unique provision in the Indian Patents Act, 1970 (section 146(2)), and year after year, patentees are mandated to submit information (through Form 27) on the extent to which they’ve worked their patent i.e converted it to an innovative product and supplied the product to

Form 27 and Draft Patent (Amendment) Rules, 2015 Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review ( 1st-7th November)

/ By / Others

SpicyIP Highlight of the Week ! Our SpicyIP Highlight of the Week was Balaji’s summary post  on the Ferani Hotels v. State Information Commissioner judgement that brought up for consideration a question that involved an interesting overlap of intellectual property and the RTI. It dealt with a writ petition filed by Ferani Hotels against an order issued by the State Information Commissioner in an appeal filed by Mr. Nusli Wadia, directing the Bombay Municipal Corporation to disclose information concerning the petitioner’s

SpicyIP Weekly Review ( 1st-7th November) Read More »

Authors’ Guild v. Google – A Fair Use victory, and a chance for introspection

/ By / Copyright

After Lenz v. Universal, the US Courts have hit the ball right out of the park once again with yet another Fair Use ruling! This time, the ruling comes from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, New York, in the Authors Guild v. Google. This is a fascinating case with quite some history, which I explore in this post. [Long Post Ahead] This case started in 2005, and concerns Google’s ambitious Google Books program. The program (which I think all

Authors’ Guild v. Google – A Fair Use victory, and a chance for introspection Read More »

Call for Submissions: Indian Journal of International Economic Law

/ By / Publication

We are very happy to announce this call for submissions from the Indian Journal of International Economic Law. Submissions are invited for 2 upcoming issues, one of which is focussed on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. More details below and in the IJIEL Final Call for Submissions document: The Indian Journal of International Economic Law is now accepting submissions for its upcoming issues – Volume 8(1) and 8(2). As you all know, the Indian Journal of International Economic Law (IJIEL) is a law journal published

Call for Submissions: Indian Journal of International Economic Law Read More »

Trade Secrets and the Right to Information: Thoughts on Ferani Hotels v. State Information Commissioner [Part I]

/ By / Others, Overlaps in IP, Trade Secret

A recent judgement [PDF] from the Bombay High Court has thrown the spotlight on the interplay between IP protection and the Right to Information Act. Over the course of two posts, I’ll summarise the judgement and try to engage with some of the issues that inhabit its penumbra. By their very nature, the values sought to be protected by IP law seem to be at odds with those sought to be protected by the RTI Act. The former is aimed

Trade Secrets and the Right to Information: Thoughts on Ferani Hotels v. State Information Commissioner [Part I] Read More »

CTR v. Sergi- Interim Injunction or Mini Trial?

/ By / Patent

[We bring to you a guest post by Prashant Reddy on the recent CTR v. Sergi patent case decided by the Bombay High Court. In this post, Prashant offers a lucid and detailed critique of Justice Gautam Patel’s judgment] Justice Gautam Patel has recently issued an interim injunction in a long running patent infringement lawsuit between Indian company CTR Manufacturing Industries Ltd. (“CTR”) which is the owner of patent no. 202302 and the French company Sergi Transformer Explosion Prevention Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

CTR v. Sergi- Interim Injunction or Mini Trial? Read More »

Can IPRs be treated as ‘plant’ under Section 43(3) of the Income Tax Act?

/ By / Copyright, Patent, Trademark

On 15th October, the Supreme Court of India delivered its judgment in Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works v. CIT (judgment available here) on the issue whether the acquisition of trademarks, copyright and technical know-how can be treated as “plant and machinery” so that depreciation/amortization may be claimed on them under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Facts of the Case: Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works (MGBW) is a beedi-manufacturing business, which was established in 1940 as a partnership firm. The

Can IPRs be treated as ‘plant’ under Section 43(3) of the Income Tax Act? Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Reviews (19th to 31st October)

/ By / Others

(Posting on behalf of Kartik Chawla.) The SpicyIP Highlight of the Fortnight period is Thomas’ post on the Enforcement Directorate attaching IPRS’ assets. He discusses the bases of the allegations, and makes note of the fact that an attachment by the ED indicates that there is the ED at least has reasons for believing that the proceeds in question are the proceeds of a crime. He discusses the history of the IPRS, shrouded in mystery as it is, and how

SpicyIP Weekly Reviews (19th to 31st October) Read More »

Spicy Tidbits: Novelty with respect to the administration of IPRs: New Draft Patent Rules and a New Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks

/ By / Design, Patent, Trademark

We bring to you two new tidbits about the IPR scene in India. A new set of draft rules amending the Patent Rules, 2003 have been released by the DIPP. The new draft rules are available here. It is interesting to note that there are changes in the patent working rules. Readers may remember the PIL filed on this very same issue by Prof. Basheer (see here). Mathews will bring out a detailed post on this issue. Additionally, the new

Spicy Tidbits: Novelty with respect to the administration of IPRs: New Draft Patent Rules and a New Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks Read More »

Scroll to Top