Sanctity of Section 21

/ By / Uncategorized

In the last post, Mr.Basheer has proposed a new way of dealing with the anomalies in practice when it comes to applying Section 21 of the Patents Act. The general opinion among patent practitioners is that the provision is used to unfairly get an applicant to “abandon” his application since there is no time limit on how long the patent office can sit on the application without responding to the applicant. It appears that there is something else interesting as […]

Sanctity of Section 21 Read More »

"Abandoning" Legal Fogginess: A Proposal for Patent Clarity

/ By / Uncategorized

Word: aban·don Pronunciation: \ə-ˈban-dən\Function: transitive verbMeaning: to give up with the intent of never again claiming a right or interest in So speaks an entry in the famous Webster’s dictionary. Or for that matter, any other dictionary. Perhaps a genre of books that the Indian Patent Office (IPO) actively shies away from. How else might one explain the fact that patent applications that are passionately prosecuted by keen applicants end up being speciously branded as “abandoned” under the infamous Section

"Abandoning" Legal Fogginess: A Proposal for Patent Clarity Read More »

New Commercial Courts Bill to bring about radical reform in the adjudication of big ticket IP disputes

/ By / Uncategorized

In its recently concluded Winter Session, the lower house of Parliament, the Lok Sabha, passed ‘The Commercial Division of High Courts Bill’, 2009. The Bill which is based on the recommendations of the 188th Report of the Law Commission of India aims at the adjudication of big ticket commercial disputes, Rs. 5 crores or above, within a timespan of one year. The Bill was consequently sent to the Rajya Sabha which has referred the Bill to the Select Committee on

New Commercial Courts Bill to bring about radical reform in the adjudication of big ticket IP disputes Read More »

Guest Post on Intermediary Liability and IT Amendment Act

/ By / Uncategorized

Previously, SpicyIP readers have come across a discussion surrounding the liability of Internet Service Providers in the light of the provisions of the Information Technology Amendment Act, 2008. Following the notification of said Act (here), a Guest Post (here) had been put by Aditya Gupta, final year student of National University of Law, Jodhpur, and a follow-up post by Professor Shamnad Basheer (here). All these posts sought to discuss the different dimensions of intermediary liability under the Information Technology (IT)

Guest Post on Intermediary Liability and IT Amendment Act Read More »

Copyright in a Patent Specification (?)

/ By / Copyright, Patent

Does copyright subsist in a patent specification? The answer to this may seem obvious to most, but I did rather articulate on the obvious clearly than overlook something clearly obvious. In Catnic Components Ltd. & Anr. v. Hill and Smith Ltd. (1978), it was held by the UK High Court (Chancery Division) that copyright in a patent specification ceases to subsist upon publication of the patent application. This UK judgment is well-known for its use of the “pith and marrow”

Copyright in a Patent Specification (?) Read More »

Bayer’s Nexavar Found Too Expensive in the UK

/ By / Drug Regulation

Even as Bayer has challenged a Delhi High Court decision refusing to import the problematic concept of “patent linkage” to India (hearings at the appellate court have concluded and we now await a decision), Gauri Kamath, a reputed pharma journalist, has a very interesting post on the high price of this important cancer drug. She also reflects on a strangely paradoxical drug pricing issue in her recently unveiled blog that has some of the most interesting articles that I have

Bayer’s Nexavar Found Too Expensive in the UK Read More »

Reviewing the Indian Patent Regime After 5 Years

/ By / Patent

Jyothi Datta of the Hindu Business Line has an interesting write up, documenting reactions after 5 years of the introduction of the pharmaceutical product patent regime in India. She also has a separate write up documenting an interview with the IPO Controller General, PH Kurian where he states some of the latest figures pertaining to patent applications/grants from India. Here is what she writes in the five year review piece: “It was on the eve of January 2005 that an

Reviewing the Indian Patent Regime After 5 Years Read More »

Does there lie an Appeal from S.21 of the Patents Act?

/ By / Patent

First things first, SpicyIP wishes its readers (and others too) a Merry Christmas! Is abandonment of an application under Section 21 of the Patents Act an appealable decision under Section 117A of the Act? This was the question that arose before the IPAB in Accenture Global Services GmBH and BT Group Inc v. Controller General of Patents. The facts of the case are as follows: 1. An application for a patent was filed at the Patent Office in Delhi claiming

Does there lie an Appeal from S.21 of the Patents Act? Read More »

Indian Copyright Amendments Procure Cabinet Approval

/ By / Copyright

The government issued a press release announcing that the much awaited and controversial copyright amendment bill has now cleared “cabinet”, a group of senior ministers that represent the highest decision making body of the government. Unfortunately, since the winter session of Parliament is over and done with, the Bill is only likely to be introduced in the budget session of Parliament in February 2010. As many of you may know, the amendment process began around the year 2005 and the

Indian Copyright Amendments Procure Cabinet Approval Read More »

SS.105 and 106 of the Patents Act

/ By / Patent

The Ram Kumar dual SIM case has been discussed extensively on SpicyIP; a judgment was delivered by the Punjab and Haryana High Court this August involving Ram Kumar’s patent in which a declaratory judgment was sought by Micromax Informatics Ltd. under Section 105 of the Patents Act, 1970. The brief background leading to the case is as follows:1. Ram Kumar has a patent (214388) on a dual SIM technology which allows the user to use both the SIM cards simultaneously

SS.105 and 106 of the Patents Act Read More »

Scroll to Top