From Ashes to Dust – War at the Nets…

/ By / Uncategorized

THE FACTS Earlier this year (in April), the English High Court found Bestnet Europe, a British company manufacturing mosquito nets and its executives liable for breach of confidence for having misused Vestergaard Frandsen’s (a Danish company) trade secrets. For more background information, Vestergaard Frandsen is a developer of leading products to prevent the spread of such diseases as malaria, diarrhoea and HIV. The company’s home page reads as follows:“…an international company specializing in complex emergency response and disease control products…. […]

From Ashes to Dust – War at the Nets… Read More »

WIPO Rules in Tata’s Favour on Cyber-squatting

/ By / Uncategorized

In a decision delivered on the 25th of last month, WIPO ruled in favour of Tata sons requiring Gurgaon-based travel portal MakeMyTrip to transfer the domain oktatabyebye.com to Tata. On behalf of Tata, it was submitted that ‘TATA’ is a well-known and registered trademark and service mark over which Tata, being the registered proprietor had statutory rights as well as common law rights by virtue of a long and continuous use. Therefore, there was scope for confusion in the minds

WIPO Rules in Tata’s Favour on Cyber-squatting Read More »

Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Law: Friends or Foes?

/ By / Competition Law, Innovation

In several previous posts, we have debated on aspects of the interaction of IP with competition law. These issues are all the more important in Indian intellectual property now, with the coming into force of several provisions of the Competition Act, 2002. The possibility of tensions between IP and competition law seems to have been present in the mind of the legislature, when it made some IP-specific exceptions in Section 3(5) of the Act. Among the important questions which are

Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Law: Friends or Foes? Read More »

Strange Twist in the Novartis Glivec Case: Justice Katju Recuses Himself

/ By / Uncategorized

The Novartis Glivec saga took a rather strange twist at the Supreme Court, with Justice Markandey Katju recusing himself from hearing the matter. As noted in a previous blog post, the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) held, in what could only be termed as a flight of legal fancy, that since the price of Glivec was too high, it was against “public order” and therefore a patent ought not to be granted in favour of Novartis! It also ruled against

Strange Twist in the Novartis Glivec Case: Justice Katju Recuses Himself Read More »

A "Spurious" Definition: Need to Amend the Drug and Cosmetics Act

/ By / Drug Regulation

As many of you know, the latest amendment to the Drugs and Cosmetics Act came into force on August 10, 2009 vide Central Government notification no. S.O.2076(E). This bill was first introduced in Parliament in December 2003. It was passed as the (Drugs and Cosmetics (Amendment) Act, 2008) by both Houses in October 2008 and received Presidential assent in December 2008. The fact that this 2008 amendment provides for increased penalties for trafficking in spurious drugs is laudable; however, the

A "Spurious" Definition: Need to Amend the Drug and Cosmetics Act Read More »

Claim Construction II

/ By / Patent

In the last post on claim construction, I had discussed a few preliminary principles; pursuant to requests from readers asking for concrete examples to explain the principles better, I did a bit of reading and thought it best to explain the application of the principles using judgments, instead of merely parroting a standard list of dos and donts on claim construction. I shall discuss a judgment which was delivered early this month in Exergen Corp. v. S.A.A.T Systems by the

Claim Construction II Read More »

The Mashelkar Committee Report on Incremental Patents: A 3-D Perspective

/ By / Uncategorized

The Mint carried an editorial of mine on the revised Mashelkar Committee Report. As with other previous posts on this blog, this is an attempt to bust prevailing myths regarding the Committee report and its association with section 3(d). Encouraging Drug Innovation The Mashelkar committee report on drug patent law may have stirred controversy, but it sets the right tone Shamnad Basheer In a momentous decision for Indian patent law and pharmaceutical innovation policy, the government this month accepted the

The Mashelkar Committee Report on Incremental Patents: A 3-D Perspective Read More »

Breaking News: Supreme Court Dismisses Roche "Tarceva" Petition

/ By / Uncategorized

Earlier today, the Indian Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition filed by Roche, challenging the order passed by the division bench of the Delhi High Court. However, the bench consisting of Justice Dalvir Bhandari and Justice MK Sharma (both formerly of the Delhi High Court) ordered that the ongoing trial at the Delhi High Court be expedited. They also stated that nothing in the Delhi Division bench order would bind the trial court judge, who is expected to decide

Breaking News: Supreme Court Dismisses Roche "Tarceva" Petition Read More »

SpicyIP Tidbits: coconut-picking and musician-forgetting

/ By / Innovation

Where have all the nariyals gone? The industries department of the Government of Kerala has announced a reward of Rs 10 lakh who can invent a coconut-picking machine. According to this report from the BBC, the reward is open to anyone in the world who can create a machine that reaches coconuts at 30 metres. Apparently, professional pickers are becoming a rare species, and coconut palms are bearing the burden. (Image from here) I second the search whole-heartedly, not least

SpicyIP Tidbits: coconut-picking and musician-forgetting Read More »

IP outsourcing threatens national interest?

/ By / Patent

The New Wave of Protectionism is here, in IP, too. Outsourcing in IP/law seems to be the latest target of the anti-outsourcing brigade in the US, going by a letter that is doing the rounds. Apparently authored by a Patent Agent at a US law firm, this letter argues that outsourcing in IP, which is “foolish and dangerous”, threatens “national interest”. With a subject line that refers to the “Blatent (sic) Disregard or Violation of U.S. Commerce and Trade Regulations

IP outsourcing threatens national interest? Read More »

Scroll to Top