Uncategorized

INDIAN MUSIC COMPOSERS : "INSPIRATION" OR "COPYING"?


Strangely enough, as Mrinalini has been posting on youtube and copyright issues, I came across these youtube clippings of an interview dealing with the alleged “plagiarism in the Indian music industry”. I’ll briefly describe these interviews, not least because one is not certain when Youtube is likely to be put on notice that these are copyrighted clips. These clips are from an interview that was broadcast on CNBC TV 18 (talk about copyright and youtube!!) by the hard hitter, Karan…


Read More »
Uncategorized

NEED CO-BLOGGER


Anyone who is interested in co-blogging on SPICYIP (particularly on trademark/GI’s and copyright issues (or any other IP/innovation issue that is not currently being covered by the blog), please get in touch with me at [email protected]


Read More »
Uncategorized

A rose by any other name, speaks the same???!!!!


A short synopsis of an interesting decision on patent law by a court in Bombay: Speaking Roses International Inc. v. Controller-General of Patents & Anr.(Misc. Petition No. 13/2006) Decision date: 12th February 2007 • Petitioners applied for a patent on 19.09.2002 for the method of providing an image on an organic product (flowers) however, the Respondent rejected the application by an order dated 19.04.2006.• The petition came up on board normally but the Respondents failed to appear despite service and…


Read More »
Uncategorized

You Tube and § 79 of the IT Act – A Second Look


I was not really expecting any comments on the short note I posted last week on § 79 of the IT Act and Pawan Duggal’s comment regarding YouTube’s liability. However, I did get an interesting observation by email from Mathew Chacko, an intellectual property lawyer in Delhi. I quote from his email: “You Tube’s liabilities are probably going to originate in copyright law and a theory of network service provider liability under copyright law will probably be based on theories…


Read More »
Data Exclusivity

"MASHELKAR COMMITTEE EFFECT" ON THE DATA EXCLUSIVITY DEBATE


In a piece titled “Pharma firms will have to wait a while for data exclusivity norms”, the Economic Times states: “Call it the Mashelkar effect! The Satwant Reddy committee, which is examining whether MNCs should be allowed to guard their costly clinical data from local rivals, is unlikely to take a call on the issue in the near future. The decision has been taken considering the sensitive nature of the issue and the strong opposition NGOs and a section of…


Read More »

Compulsory Licensing and TRIPS compatibility


It seems like the Thai compulsory licensing controversy is not the only one doing the rounds. A less controversial one (as it doesn’t deal with public health) is a complaint by Philips that a compulsory license issued in Taiwan over its CD patents is not compatible with TRIPS. IP Geek reports: “The European Commission has launched an in-depth investigation into the WTO consistency of the granting of compulsory licenses by Taiwan for recordable compact discs (CDRs) under the Trade Barriers…


Read More »
Uncategorized

You Tube and § 79 of the IT Act


YouTube was recently reported as having removed world cup cricket video clips after the ICC accused it of copyright infringement. In the brief report, Pavan Duggal was reported as having said that “under Section 79, IT Act, network service providers (like Google, You Tube) shall be liable for all third party data or information made available.” The statement may be a mis-quote or a mistake of law. In either event, section 79 of the IT Act actually states the exact…


Read More »
Uncategorized

Patents and Public Interest – Musings from the Thai Compulsory License Controversy


The conflict (or apparent conflict) between patent rights and public health once again came into the limelight with the Thai government granting compulsory licenses to three patented drugs. On November 29 last year, the Thai government made its first strike with the announcement that it was granting a compulsory license to the Government Pharmaceutical Organization of Thailand (Click Here) for production of Merck’s patent on Efavirenz (an AIDS drug sold as Stocrin). Following closely in line was the compulsory license…


Read More »
Uncategorized

RANBAXY vs PFIZER ("LIPITOR") SCORECARD


I had posted on the Lipitor litigation sometime back and promised to come back with more analysis. The Lipitor litigation is unfortunately too complex and scattered to track. Here’s a helpful site that helps you track this. The IP Kat reports: “The Lipitor Scorecard is a popular feature of IP scholar and strategist Duncan Bucknell’s website. It charts the state of progress – and eventually the result – of the disputes between Ranbaxy and Pfizer over the Lipitor patent in…


Read More »
Uncategorized

INDIAN PATENTS AND THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION


The Indian Patent Office website now has a separate section on what kind of information can be accessed under the “Right to Information Act”. I’m curious to know if any one has attempted to access information under this and what the results have been. I understand that the RTI was invoked in the context of the Tenofovir opposition. For those not familiar with this case, here is an extract from the South-North Development Monitor (SUNS) # 6027, 15 May 2006….


Read More »