Trademark

Retroactive Trademark Assignment Agreements: Another Slip in IPAB’s Decision in Eveready Industries v. Kamlesh Chadha?

by
Leave a Comment

In my earlier post on the IPAB’s decision (dated September 22, 2020) in Eveready Industries India Ltd. v. Mrs. Kamlesh Chadha, I had introduced the case and covered the issue concerning the renewal procedure. In this post, I discuss another connected issue, concerning the validity of the assignment agreement executed in 2009 but with effect from 2005. Based on evidence, the IPAB concluded that this was a sham document and I don’t intend to get into an analysis of whether…


Read More »
Patent

RTI on Patent Opposition Details Reveals Concerning (and Possibly Wrong?) Numbers

by
5 Comments

[This post was co-authored with Praharsh Gour.] Long time readers may remember earlier posts by Prashant (in 2017 and 2012), looking into opposition disposal and pendency rates. In a similar exercise, while trying to collate data on patent oppositions (filing, disposal and pendency rates), we looked through data available in the Annual Reports published by the Office of Controller General of Patents for the last few years. On finding that the Annual Reports for 2018-19, and 2019-20 hadn’t been published…


Read More »
Trademark

Trademark Renewal Procedure: A Slip in IPAB’s Decision in Eveready Industries v. Kamlesh Chadha?

by
Leave a Comment

The judgement of the IPAB (dated September 22, 2020) in Eveready Industries India Ltd v. Mrs. Kamlesh Chadha concerns original rectification petitions against two trademark registrations of the respondents – one for the word mark ‘Eveready’ and the other for a logo of Eveready, both in class 8 (screwdrivers, cutting pliers, hand tools etc.). The IPAB allowed the rectifications and directed the removal of the two marks from the Trade Marks Registry. This judgment is a highly fact-oriented and my…


Read More »
Copyright

Is Intermediary Liability Decision in Shree Krishna Int’l v. YouTube Copyright Dispute in Line with MySpace?

by
1 Comment

We’re pleased to bring to you a guest post by Arth Nagpal and Harsh Srivastava, analysing Gurugram District Court’s decision on intermediary liability for copyright infringement in Shree Krishna International v. YouTube (2019) in light of Delhi High Court’s landmark decision in MySpace (2016). They argue that the Punjab & Haryana High Court, before which an appeal from the decision is listed for final hearing, should follow MySpace and bring clarity on the liability of intermediaries for copyright infringement. Arth…


Read More »
Copyright Innovation Others Patent Trademark

SpicyIP Weekly Review (October 26 – November 1)

by
Leave a Comment

Topical Highlight Mountain Dew Trademark Battle: David v. Goliath or Misapplication of Prior User Rights? In this post, Adyasha analyses the decision of the City Civil Court of Hyderabad against PepsiCo, ruling that Hyderabad-based Magfast Beverages enjoys prior user rights over ‘MOUNTAIN DEW’ (identical to PepsiCo’s mark for its citrus flavoured soda) for their packaged drinking water business. She first looks at the facts, and the history of both business’ use of these marks in detail, as well as previous…


Read More »
Call for Submissions Opportunities Publication

Call for Submissions: NLUJ Centre for Intellectual Property Studies Blog

by
Leave a Comment

We’re pleased to inform you that the Centre for Intellectual Property Studies at National Law University, Jodhpur is inviting submissions for its blog on a rolling basis. For further details, please see the announcement below: Call for Submissions – NLUJ Centre for Intellectual Property Studies Blog The NLUJ Centre for Intellectual Property Studies Blog invites original and unpublished submissions on a rolling basis, from students, researchers, policy-makers, academicians and lawyers, relating to any contemporary debates in intellectual property law and allied…


Read More »
Opportunities Publication

Call for Submissions: NLIU’s Blog on IP and Technology Law (Rolling Submissions)

by
Leave a Comment

We’re pleased to inform you that Cell for Studies in Intellectual Property Rights (CSIPR) at NLIU, Bhopal’s is inviting submissions for its Blog on IP and Technology Law. For further details, please see the announcement below: Call for Blogs: NLIU’s Blog on IP and Technology Law (Rolling Submissions) About the Institution National Law Institute University is a law school and a Centre for research located in Bhopal, India. Established in 1997 by the State of Madhya Pradesh, it is one of the…


Read More »
Trademark

Mountain Dew Trademark Battle: David v. Goliath or Misapplication of Prior User Rights?

by
Leave a Comment

PepsiCo has suffered a blow in its 16 year long legal battle to secure trademark rights for its famous soda, ‘MOUNTAIN DEW’. The Additional Chief Judge of the City Civil Court of Hyderabad has recently ruled that the Hyderabad-based Magfast Beverages enjoys prior user rights over an identical trademark for their packaged drinking water (‘PDW’) business. In this post, I discuss this order and certain other issues in the dispute that may require more attention. Facts The plaintiff Syed Ghaziuddin…


Read More »
Innovation Patent

Critiquing Prizes as an Alternative Mechanism for Promoting Innovation

by
Leave a Comment

We’re pleased to bring to you a guest post by Avani Bagaria, analysing the benefits and pitfalls of using prizes as an alternative to patents for incentivsing innovation. Avani is a 5th year student at Jindal Global Law School, Sonipat. Critiquing Prizes as an Alternative Mechanism for Promoting Innovation  Avani Bagaria Introduction Under the prize mechanism for encouraging innovation, the inventors are awarded through the means of cash prizes rather than granting a monopoly over the usage of their invention…


Read More »
Others

SpicyIP Weekly Review (October 19- 25)

by
Leave a Comment

Topical Highlight Delhi HC Delivers a Blow to “Delhivery”: Rules the Mark to be Phonetically Generic; Ineligible for Statutory Benefits In this post, Praharsh analyses the Delhi High Court order vacating an earlier interim injunction granted in favour of DELHIVERY. He first notes the arguments made by both parties towards distinctiveness of the mark. He highlights the spectrum of distinctiveness approach followed by courts to determine if a mark is registrable and thus assess whether it fall within the following…


Read More »
  1. Pages:
  3. 1
  4. 2
  5. 3
  6. 4
  7. 5
  8. 6
  9. 7
  10. 8
  11. 9
  12. 10
  13. 11
  14. 12
  15. ...
  16. 569