Gilead Raises Privacy Concerns by Collecting Patient Data Regarding Sofosbuvir

/ By / Patent, Privacy

The Economic Times reports that Gilead Sciences is collecting details and keeping track of patients purchasing generic versions of its blockbuster Hepatitis-C medicine Sofosbuvir in an effort to prevent diversion of stocks to outside markets. In 2014, Gilead had voluntarily licensed the Hepatitis-C drug to seven Indian generic drug companies including Cipla, Ranbaxy, etc. According to the terms of the license, all these companies are allowed to set their own prices provided that royalties are paid to Gilead. The licensees […]

Gilead Raises Privacy Concerns by Collecting Patient Data Regarding Sofosbuvir Read More »

Delhi High court grants interim injunction; restrains Glenmark from selling generic version of anti-diabetic drug Januvia (Sitagliptin)

/ By / Patent

On April 2013, Glenmark launched the generic version of Merck’s popular antidiabetic drug Januvia (Sitagliptin) and Janumet (combination of sitagliptin and Metformin). Subsequently Merck filed a suit against Glenmark seeking interim relief. The Delhi HC (Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw) denied interim relief to Merck. After denial of interim relief, Merck was also briefly engaged in mediation with Glenmark over the Januvia patent. Readers may recall that we had blogged about it here here and here. Aggrieved by the denial of

Delhi High court grants interim injunction; restrains Glenmark from selling generic version of anti-diabetic drug Januvia (Sitagliptin) Read More »

You can’t have the ‘pi’ and eat it too!

/ By / Trademark

Belated ‘Pi Day’! (Which did not fall on a Friday!) This post deals with the lately baked trademark issue of ‘π’ versus ‘π.’ (pi day is celebrated on March 14 (3/14) The trademark at issue in this case was the symbol pi followed by a full stop: “π.” (U.S. trademark registration 4,473,631). This registration was issued to Paul Ingrisano, aka “Pi Productions Corp” (a Brooklyn based apparel artist). π. is used by Pi Productions Corp to brand T shirts etc. (here and

You can’t have the ‘pi’ and eat it too! Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review ( March 15 – March 22, 2015)

/ By / Others

The SpicyIP Highlight of the Week ! In this week’s Highlight, Kartik analysed and discussed in great  detail the recent judgement in the Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Intex case delivered by Justice Manmohan Singh of the Delhi HC, where Ericsson had been granted an injunction against Intex for any devices that infringed upon Ericsson’s eight Standard Essential Patents – we had earlier reported on the case  here and here. In the course of this post, Kartik analyses point by point the

SpicyIP Weekly Review ( March 15 – March 22, 2015) Read More »

The ‘Cafe Madras’ Controversy

/ By / Trademark

Some of our readers who have ventured out into Matunga, Bombay might have come across ‘Cafe Madras’, a restaurant serving Udipi Cuisine. Last week the Bombay High Court delivered judgment over a trademark dispute filed by ‘Cafe Madras’  against Lime &Chilli Hospitality Services who have opened up their own Cafe Madras in Bombay. In an exceedingly well written judgment by Justice G. S. Patel (the judgment is worth a read for the literary flourish in addition to the well reasoned

The ‘Cafe Madras’ Controversy Read More »

Ericsson v. Intex, Part 1 – SEPs, Injunctions, and gathering clouds for Software Patenting?

/ By / Patent

In the recent judgment by Justice Manmohan Singh of the Delhi High Court in the case of Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Intex, Swedish telecom giant Ericsson was granted an injunction against Intex for any devices that infringed on the eight Standard Essential Patents that are part of Ericsson’s portfolio. The Court also ordered Intex to pay 50% of the royalties from the filing of the suit to Ericsson. We had covered this issue earlier here and here. The Court has

Ericsson v. Intex, Part 1 – SEPs, Injunctions, and gathering clouds for Software Patenting? Read More »

Shemaroo Entertainment secures a curious John Doe from Bombay HC

/ By / Copyright

 Entertainment industries everywhere around the world tend to put in years of hard effort and monetary investments to being their creations to the audiences.  Speaking of the Bollywood Industry, there’s a clear divide between works and ‘works of art’ – every time you give your eyes the unsolicited pleasure of watching an Aap Ka Suroor or Bodyguard, you think the bar can’t fall any lower, and come Happy New Year, you’re forced to reconsider your earlier affirmations. However, regardless of

Shemaroo Entertainment secures a curious John Doe from Bombay HC Read More »

IPR Workshop on Patent Strategies in EU for Pharma and Biotech [April 30, 2015 (Hyderabad)/ 1 May, 2015 (Mumbai)]

/ By / Event

Professor Heinz Goddar, Senior Partner, Boehmert & Boehmert and his colleagues are conducting two one-day workshops that will provide comprehensive insight into recent developments at  the European Patent Office and case law. This will be followed by analysis and practical considerations on how the law affects claim and specifications in Europe, with specific reference to Germany.  The workshop will be held in Hyderabad on April 30, 2015 and in Mumbai on May 1, 2015.               . The

IPR Workshop on Patent Strategies in EU for Pharma and Biotech [April 30, 2015 (Hyderabad)/ 1 May, 2015 (Mumbai)] Read More »

Tribunals in Troubled Waters: Highlights of the IPAB Decision

/ By / Patent, Trademark

Continuing from our earlier post breaking the news of the Madras High Court striking down key provisions of IPAB appointments as unconstitutional, we’ve now uploaded the actual text of the order here. Here are some of the key highlights of the decision (warning: long post follows) 1. Independence of the Judiciary/Separation of Powers The court agrees with the main thrust of our petition that the current composition of the IPAB (and the eligibility criteria) poses a grave threat to the independence of

Tribunals in Troubled Waters: Highlights of the IPAB Decision Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review (March 8–14, 2015)

/ By / Others

In the highlight of this week, Shamnad Sir reported a victory in his writ petition before the Madras High Court which challenged the constitutionality of provisions relating to the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB). In this first round, which started in 2011, critical provisions of the Trademarks Act which provide for the establishment of the Board were struck down as unconstitutional. Shamnad Sir wrote that the Court held the provision providing for government officers to be elected as judicial members

SpicyIP Weekly Review (March 8–14, 2015) Read More »

Scroll to Top