Lakshmi Kumaran & Sridharan AttorneysAn ISO 9001 / 27001 certified law firm

IPR News

Search From Date To Date
Copyrights – Architect cannot restrain building owner from demolishing it

20th June 2019

The Delhi High Court has held that the Plaintiff’s (architect’s) copyright in the work of architecture does not extend to any rights over the building based on the architecture such that plaintiff can seek damages for demolition of the said building.

The question before the Court was whether an architect, as autho...

Design registration – Argument of functional differences, not material

20th June 2019

The Calcutta High Court has upheld the Controller’s Order cancelling the design registration in respect of Coaster Brake Hub because it was not significantly distinguishable from the prior design of the Russian model published earlier (in Velo Bike Special Issue).

The Controller had opined that the modificatio...

Trademarks – Nutraceuticals are akin to medicines for test of passing off

11th June 2019

In a case involving registered trademark names of nutraceuticals with both products having ‘GLO’ as prefix, the Delhi High Court has held that mere fact that products are not pharmaceuticals, is not convincing for adoption of less stringent test for passing-off.

It held that just because the nutraceuticals are ter...

Trademarks – Passing-off when mark used in cognate and allied products

11th June 2019

In a case where Plaintiff and Defendant sold tea and biscuits respectively under the mark TODAY, Delhi High Court has held that adoption of the mark for biscuit, which is a cognate and allied product of tea, will result in deception thus passing off as both are served and consumed together.

The Court for this purpose ...

Statutory licensing under Section 31D of Copyright Act not covers internet broadcasting

15th May 2019

The Bombay High Court has held that statutory licencing under Section 31D of the Copyright Act is meant only for radio and television broadcast and excludes internet broadcasting. The Court was of the view that Defendants’ on demand streaming services offered through internet as an “internet broadcasting organisation” do no...

Exclusive jurisdiction of court by agreement not violate Copyright Section 62

09th May 2019

The Delhi High Court has held that an agreement conferring exclusive jurisdiction on a particular Court is not in violation of Section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 or Section 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957.

Court reiterated that where more than one Court has jurisdiction, parties can legally confer jurisdiction to any on...

Trademark registration confers rights on whole and not on individual parts

07th May 2019

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that registration of trademark under Section 17(1) of the Trademarks Act confers exclusive rights to use trademark as a whole and not a right of registration to individual parts.

The Court in this regard held that plaintiff can claim rights to use ‘Delhi International School’ lab...

Trademarks – No suit for passing off maintainable if plaintiff’s use not honest

01st May 2019

The Delhi High Court has held that plaintiff which is a sister concern of and hired by Elder Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (EPL), cannot claim latter’s trademark and reputation on liquidation of EPL.

Holding that such use with the knowledge of registration of trademark is not bona fide, the court observed that post liqui...

Patents – Exemption under Section 107A available to exports for clinical studies

29th April

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court has held that sale, use, construction of patented products by persons who do not hold patents or licenses from patentees, in terms of Section 107A of the Patents Act is correct provided it is reasonably related to research and development of information in compliance with laws of India (or the importing ...

Patents - Cross examination to be allowed in highly technical cases

20th March

The Delhi High Court has held that where there is a post-grant opposition based on an expert opinion to invalidate a patent under Section 25(2) of the Patents Act, the petitioner (who had acquired the patentee firm) can be allowed to cross-examine the expert under Section 79.

The Court in the case of Onyx Therapeutics&nb...

Broadcast of copyright work – De minimis infringement and use for review

25th March

The Delhi High Court has held that an assignee of copyrights is not required to implead original owner and therefore the suit cannot be dismissed for non-compliance of Section 61 of the Copyright Act which provides that the licensee is required to implead the owner of the copyright as a defendant.

It observed that, in view of the...

Use of mark ‘The TICER’ replicating mark ‘TIGER’ is a case of “chunking”

19th February

In a suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, copyright, design and passing off and for ancillary reliefs, the Delhi High Court has held that use of the mark ‘The TICER’ by the defendant as opposed to ‘TIGER’ of the plaintiff is a case of ‘chunking’ or ‘word superiority ef...

Page(s) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 
Please refer 'Archives' section to see older items.
Search People
Search People
Alphabetical by First Name
Enter at least a name or a keyword to search