Dorling Kindersley v. Sanguine Technical Publishers

/ By / Copyright

A recent Delhi High Court order passed on 21 January, 2013  with respect to copyright licensing has come to our notice. An analysis of the judgement has been attempted in this blog post. Facts: In 2009, Pearson Education entered into an agreement with Sanguine Technical Publishers and its three partners, M.R.Kamalakar Pandit, Lal.M.Prasad and Dr.D.Ganesh Rao to co-brand engineering books. The agreement was for a period of 48 months and could be extended to 60 month.In 2012, Pearson was informed […]

Dorling Kindersley v. Sanguine Technical Publishers Read More »

BMS Hepatitis Patent Invalidated: A Viral Effect for India?

/ By / Uncategorized

In a development with significant ramifications for India, a US district court recently invalidated a pharmaceutical patent covering Baraclude (Entecavir), a leading anti-viral drug for Hepatitis B patients. The drug brings in more than a billion dollars each year for BMS!  The invalidation was pursuant to a law suit bought by BMS (the patentee) against Teva, a leading Israeli generic company. This drug is of particular interest to India, given a roaring patent contest on this front between BMS and

BMS Hepatitis Patent Invalidated: A Viral Effect for India? Read More »

Patent prosecution highway: A potential game changer for India

/ By / Uncategorized

     The patent prosecution highway (PPH) is a kind of bidirectional work sharing agreement between two patent offices which allows examiners of one patent office to reuse search and examination results already conducted by another patent office. This post aims to explore how India might possibly benefit by becoming a part of the patent prosecution highway program.  The USPTO extended its first patent prosecution highway as a pilot program with Japan in July 2006. Since then the US patent prosecution highway program

Patent prosecution highway: A potential game changer for India Read More »

SpicyIP Event: Pharma IPR 2013

/ By / Uncategorized

We are pleased to announce the 2nd Annual Pharma IPR 2013 conference taking place from 10th – 12th April, 2013 in Mumbai, India. This exclusive conference is specifically designed for intellectual property professionals from the pharma and biopharma industry to gain an in-depth understanding about evolving global IPR practices, updates on the patent regime and strategies to enter new and emerging markets. Patent regimes and market entry strategies will be discussed of over 10 countries including: USA, Europe, Japan, China, Korea,

SpicyIP Event: Pharma IPR 2013 Read More »

Patent Office finally takes Form 27s seriously

/ By / Uncategorized

The Patent Office issued a public notice yesterday (i.e. February 12, 2013) directing all patentees and license holders to submit Form 27 applications for each calendar year by end of March for the previous year. The notice draws attention to Section 122(1)(b) which after the 2005 amendment allows for imposition of fine up to to 10 lakhs for non-submission. The notice can be accessed here. A similar notice was issued on December 24, 2009 by the then Controller P.H. Kurian

Patent Office finally takes Form 27s seriously Read More »

SpicyIP Weekly Review- (February Week 2)

/ By / Uncategorized

The week began with a two part post by Aparajita Lath on the impact of the digitization of content on the television, film and music industries. In the two posts, Aparajita analysed the growth trends in these industries with respect to output, revenues and creativity.  With respect to the music industry, a comparative analysis shows that sales, revenue, production and creation of new genres of music are on the rise despite digitization of music. The film and television industry are

SpicyIP Weekly Review- (February Week 2) Read More »

Why aren’t there any takers for compulsory licenses?

/ By / Patent

Last September, SpicyIP queried the Controller General of Patents relating to application filed with them seeking compulsory licenses (CL) under the Patents Act, 1970. Our primary motivation was to test the CL provisions amended in the post TRIPS era. The exact wording of the queries as below:  a. Please provide true copies of Form 17 applications filed by applicants for seeking compulsory license per Patents Act, 1970 Sections 84(1), 91, 92(1) read with Rule 96.  b. Please provide true copies

Why aren’t there any takers for compulsory licenses? Read More »

The 19 year war- Financial Times Ltd. v Times Publishing House: Before the Supreme Court

/ By / Uncategorized

The saga between Financial Times Ltd. (FTL) and Times Publishing House continues with the Supreme Court hearing the case for the first time in 19 years. As reported by the Mint, FTL filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court in 2011. The SLP was filed in order to obtain an adjournment of the appeal proceedings in the Karnataka High Court in connection with its ongoing trademark battle with Times Publishing House. In order to provide context, please read

The 19 year war- Financial Times Ltd. v Times Publishing House: Before the Supreme Court Read More »

RetractionWatch fiasco: Manipulation of DMCA notices to stifle criticism

/ By / Copyright

This post is about an Indian plagiarizer who has alleged that the original is a copy, and claimed copyright protection for his ‘original’ works using the DMCA.  Foul play against RetractionWatch:  A lot of published scientific reports and studies end up getting discredited for various reasons on a regular basis. These are consequently partially or wholly retracted. RetractionWatch is a blog solely dedicated to reporting retractions in the medical research field. Until Adam Marcus’ and Ivan Oransky’s RetractionWatch came into

RetractionWatch fiasco: Manipulation of DMCA notices to stifle criticism Read More »

IPAB directs IPO to accept national phase patent application originally filed with less fees

/ By / Uncategorized

In a recent decision issued by the IPAB, the Board in yet another excellent decision issued by Justices Sridevan and Parmar, has suggested to the patent office to implement a revised numbering scheme for applications.   The decision was issued in a case to direct the patent office to accept a national phase application filed with less than the prescribed fees.  (Decision).   In my view, the patent office has ducked a major issue for now: receiving extra fees from

IPAB directs IPO to accept national phase patent application originally filed with less fees Read More »

Scroll to Top