Secrecy directions in designs
By Dipan Banerjee & Dr. Gaurav Gupta
Most of us are familiar with provisions in Patents Law related to secrecy directions [see end note 1] on inventions relevant for defence purposes and the security of India; however, similar secrecy directions are also provided under the Designs Law [see end note 2]. This article highlights the provisions i...
Doctrine of lifting of corporate veil in trademark law
By Rishika Sharath
Corporate personality is considered as one of the most dynamic concepts of company law. It is premised on the principle that a company is regarded as an entity distinct from the shareholders constituting it. Recently, the Karnataka High Court indirectly applied this doctrine in the field of trademark law.
Trade-dress Infringement - It’s all about the looks
By Kumudavalli Seetharaman
The Indian Trade Marks law has no explicit provision relating to trade dress. However, the same is impliedly incorporated within the meaning of “mark” in Section 2(1)(m) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 which includes the shape of goods, their packaging and combination of colours. The Delhi High Court, in a rece...
Internet broadcasting companies to come within the ambit of statutory licensing
By Venkata Raghavan
This article deals with statutory licensing of copyright under the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 and whether internet broadcasting organizations are covered within the said Act. As is well known, copyright exists in any original literary, dramatic, musical works, sound recordings, cinematograph films, to name of few. No regi...
Controller overreach or common sense? - A tale of Section 83 of the Patents Act
By Dr.Amitavo Mitra
In IPR Amicus Issue No. 49, dated August 2015, the interplay between the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (BDA), and intellectual property rights in India, specifically, the Patents Act, 1970 (Act) was broadly explored, with particular reference to biological inventions.
In this article, we further attempt to explore and ...
Light at the end of the tunnel for Computer-Related Inventions?
By Mukundan Chakrapani
In the May edition of IPR Amicus, we commented on the continued ambiguity in the examination of computer-related inventions (CRIs) by the Indian Patent Office [see end note 1]. Here, we review three recent Controller’s Decisions to highlight that probably, consistency is emerging in the examination of CRIs. We hope th...
A Practical Approach to Fulfilling Section 8 Requirements
By Mukundan Chakrapani
Section 8 of the Indian Patents Act, 1970 mandates applicant(s) filing an application for a patent in India to furnish information pertaining to applications for a patent for ‘the same or substantially the same invention’ filed in any country ou...
Ambiguous standard for examination of CRIs
By Ankur Garg & Anurit Banerjee
The Indian Patent Office had issued the modified guidelines for examination of Computer Related Invention (CRI) [see end note 1] on 19 Feb 2016. The CRI guidelines propose a framework for assessing patent eligibility of such claims under section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970.
Specifically, the CRI guidel...
Product by process claims - A perspective
By Sribindhu Chivukala & Archana V
Section 2(j) of the Patents Act, 1970 (the Act) defines an invention as a new product or a process involving an inventive step and capable of industrial application. The legal protection to an invention is based on the claims of the granted patent. Typically, a p...
Obviousness - Different standards for Opposition and Revocation?
By Sudarshan Singh Shekawat
Patents are not just instruments of private commercial utilisation but also have an impact on public policy. They are thus, governed by a system which allows for challenge to the validity of a patent at different stages.
Before the Patent Office, the Act provides for ‘pre-grant opposition’ under S. 2...
The curious case of patent infringement CTR v. Sergi
By Vindhya Srinivasamani
This case pertains to a suit filed by CTR Manufacturing Industries Limited against Sergi Transformer Explosion Prevention Technologies Pvt. Ltd. for infringement of its patent IN202302 (suit patent) for “A system and method for preventing and/or detecting explosion and/or fire of electrical transformers”, with an appl...
Please refer 'Archives' section to see older items.