Search

Indian Copyright Office seeks to withdraw registration recognising AI co-author, despite arguments that no legal provision for review exists [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents information on the protection of healthcare intellectual property (IP) in India and also compares it with the IP protection approaches in Great Britain and the European Union. It is stated that pharmaceutical trade marks jurisprudence has been quite different in India from other jurisdictions. The Indian government has set up the Satwant Reddy Committee to evaluate the issue of data protection and data exclusivity. INSET: One-minute read.

The article discusses the important developments in patent, trade mark and copyright in India. Intellectual property (IP) is attaining a higher profile with increasing investment and liberalization,where major economic transition was seen. Major multinationals in diverse fields have further highlighted the need for stringent enforcement and greater understanding of IP law in the country. Moreover, an overview of bio-diversity rights regulations and trade mark judicial pronouncements is offered.

This article reports new developments related to intellectual property (IP) in India. India demonstrated its commitment to its international treaty obligations, including TRIPs, by implementing the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002, which along with the Patent Rules, 2003, came into effect from May 20, 2003. The growing importance and significance of IP can be seen in the fact that non-IP laws also include reference to IP rights. For instance, the Companies Act has been amended by the Trade Marks Act, 1999 rendering a name as undesirable for registration as a corporate name if it conflicts with a registered trade mark.

The article presents the author's view on the importance of trademark in business enterprises in India. It mentions that trademark, is a valuable asset for an organization which takes it as symbol of goodwill and distinct position in the market. It also notes on the regulations for filling proper trademark for business enterprises to the Trademark Registry in the country.

The article reflects on the development of the trademark law in India and provides a practical guide to its prosecution. It is said that the Trade Marks Act, 1999 was enacted together with the Trade Marks Rules 2003 and the Act has undergone further changes to make trademark prosecution and protection more efficient. It is also informed that one of the important features of Indian trademark law is that the Registrar's opinion can be sought as to the distinctiveness of a trademark.

The article offers information on India's legislation to prevent parallel imports. Parallel imports involve cross-border trade in a product without the permission of the manufacturer or right holder in the importing country. The Trade Marks Act 1999 of India does not specifically use the term "parallel imports" but Section 29 and Section 30 of the Act prohibit the practice. The statutory provisions contained in Sections 29 and 30 are applicable only if the goods are imported for trading purpose.

C.A. Brijesh and Sakshi Sharma of Remfry & Sagar examine the law on designs in India, detailing the requirements for design protection and assessing the overlap between this form of protection and copyright and trademark law [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

India's new Trade Marks Act provides protection of an international standard. On September 15, 2003 Indian government issued a notification giving immediate effect to a new Trade Marks Act, which had been introduced as long ago as 1999. Until now, it has not been possible to register trade marks in respect of services. Brand owners providing services in India and elsewhere, as well as those intending to set up business in India, will welcome the introduction of service mark registration. The new Act permits the registration of a wider range of marks including, in some cases, the shape of goods, elements of packaging and combinations of colours. INSET: Enforcement of rights.

Focuses on the disputes of trade marks owners concerning the Internet domain names policy in India. List of Internet domain names; Application of the principles of trade mark law; Details on the judgment of the Peshawar Soap & Chemical Ltd v Godrej Soaps Ltd.

The article discusses the need for the biggest brands to avoid genericide in India. It cites reference of a U.S. trademark case which involved the board game Monopoly, which had become so popular that its manufacturer could not take legal action against the creation of games that invoked the name "Monopoly." It notes that as per the In the Indian context, Section 36 of the Trademarks Act 1999, if a particular mark is widely used by traders, the trademark becomes vulnerable to cancellation.

The article focuses on intellectual property rights (IPR) and its significant impact on India's socioeconomic development. Topics include the intellectual property (IP) laws in the country and its compliance to the Trade-Related Aspects of Intelletual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement, the enforcement of the Trade Marks Act of 2010 in the country which imposes strict penalties on infringers and counterfeiters, and the country's plan to introduce a National Intellectual Property Strategy.

The article focuses on a conflict between herbal liquor manufacturer Mast-Jägermeister SE and the Tamil Nadu Police in India regarding the use of company's trademarks in relation to a 'don't drink and drive' campaign. Topics discussed include the issues related to the removal of signage bearing images of company's product, aspects of the Trade Marks Act 1999 concerning trademark infringement, and actions taken by the High Court of Madras in India.

The article discusses a court case wherein Ashika Incense Inc. of Bangalore was restricted by the Supreme Court of India from using the mark Eenadu in the course of its trade. Ashika was restrained from using the mark as a result of a lawsuit claiming infringement of copyright and passing-off trademark filed by the respondent company Ushodaya Enterprises in 1999. Ashika argued that the lower courts had erred by failing to consider the distinction between a copyright's existence and its infringement.

The article discusses the court care Gulfic Ltd. & Another v. Clinique Laboratories Llc & Anr. The trademark infringement case stemmed from the former's use of the mark SKINCLINIQ and label STRETCH NIL. The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in India ruled that there was no infringement was the products targeted different classes of people.

The article focuses on the legal aspects of the trade marks of business houses in India in connection with the 2009 court case Parle Products v. Parle Agro. It mentions that several large and well established business houses tend to adopt family names to serve as their house marks yet such marks can also be the main issue in disputes among family members regarding the rights to the mark. The Bombay High Court ruled that the feasibility of the use of the word Parle needs to be determined.

The article focuses on the legal aspects of non-conventional trade marks in India. It notes that the country has acknowledged the presence of non-conventional marks such as sounds and smell under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). The TRIPS holds that any sign or combination of signs that can distinguish a good or service from those of others are eligible for trade mark constitution. It adds that Indian legislation requires trade marks to be graphically represented.

From the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel to the Nokia ringtone and the stripes of 7-Eleven convenience stores, Karry Lai explains why non-traditional trade mark innovation in Asia is more than meets the eye [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports that Yahoo! Inc.'s yodel has become the first sound mark to be granted by India's trademark (TM) registry. The Trade Marks Act of 1999 in India defines a trademark as a mark capable of being represented graphically and which distinguishes the goods or services of one person from those of others.

The article reports that in May 2003, when India's Patent Act was amended, a new Section 107A was introduced. Commonly known as a Bolar provision, this research exemption enables a manufacturer of generic drugs to use a patented invention to obtain marketing approval without the patent owner's permission before the patent expires. Even if there is a product patent for a drug molecule, an Indian generic drug maker can make use of the patented invention for the purposes of getting marketing approval for their own version of that drug molecule. Basic drug research at the pre-clinical phase is usually years behind any submission to the drug approval authorities.

Presents news briefs related to intellectual property as of December 2000. Bayer AG's establishment of a research and development center in Shanghai, China; Chinese court's use of the country's trademark law and anti-unfair competition law as grounds for determining cybersquatting disputes; Delay in the legislation to allow patenting of pharmaceutical drugs in India.

The article discusses the 2013 accession of the government of India to the Madrid Protocol, a treaty for the administration of the international registration of trademarks. Topics include changes to the trade mark registration system in India in order to comply with the protocol; application pendency periods for trademarks and patents in India; and the challenges facing new members of the Madrid Protocol treaty.

The article reports on the approval of a trade mark amendment bill in India, which is expected to allow the country to join the Madrid Protocol in 2011, by the lower house of parliament in January 2010.

The article focuses on the civil suit filed by V&S Vin & Sprit Aktiebolag , owner of the Absolut trade mark, against Bangalore based pharmaceutical company Pharmed and one of its subsidiaries in India. The civil suit case is for infringing, passing off and diluting the company's popular trade mark Absolut. V&S found about the infringement in Pharmed's website in early 2007 selling anti-oxidant capsules and syrups under an identical mark.

This article explores the legal aspects of character merchandising in India. It notes the limited scope of the protection provided by trademark law for celebrities and commercial partners. In the Kanungo Media (P) Ltd. vs. RGV Film Factory case, the court ruled that titles of literary and entertainment creations are treated in the same way as the trademarks of other commercial products. Personality rights are recognized by Indian law when the character or the person has independently acquired public recognition.

The article presents information on the Trade Marks Act 1999 in India, which differentiates between well-known trade marks and trade marks generally, and provides protection to a well-known trade mark. It is stated that in India, there is no requirement that a trade mark should be well-known to the public at large, and it needs only be recognized by a relevant section of the public that includes the consumers of the goods or services and the people involved in the channels of distribution.

Reports that bureaucratic delays continue to obstruct the Trademarks Act passed by the Indian Parliament in 1999. Writ petition filed before the High Court of Delhi that challenges certain aspects of the proposed law; Claims of the petition regarding the disadvantages of the act.

Reports on the Supreme Court's introduction of guidelines to avoid the registration of deceptively similar trade marks in India. Seven-point guidelines for deciding the question of deceptive similarity of pharmaceutical trade marks; Three main arguments to be considered.