Exploring Patent Hold Up, Royalty Stacking, and Hold Out – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 3

This post discusses patent hold up, royalty stacking, and hold out in the context of the Ericsson v Lava dispute. The analysis highlights the Court’s reliance on evidence while addressing FRAND licensing arguments and SEP enforcement in India.

Read more about Exploring Patent Hold Up, Royalty Stacking, and Hold Out – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 3

Are you playing it Safe? Court encourages settlement in a music licensing case.

The Delhi High Court encouraged settlement in a dispute between PPL and Neb Sports over alleged unlicensed public performance of sound recordings at sporting events. The case highlights the importance of copyright compliance for event organisers in India.

Read more about Are you playing it Safe? Court encourages settlement in a music licensing case.

Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

The Delhi High Court dismissed CEAT’s appeal against the refusal of its FARMAX trademark, citing substantial delay and likelihood of confusion with prior marks. The court found the marks similar and the goods closely related, upholding the Registrar’s refusal.

Read more about Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

Section 3(k) principles – Ericsson vs. Lava – Part 2

This post analyses the Delhi High Court’s interpretation of Section 3(k) in Ericsson vs Lava, focusing on the patentability of algorithms and computer programs in India. It clarifies the assessment criteria for such inventions and the legislative intent behind software patentability.

Read more about Section 3(k) principles – Ericsson vs. Lava – Part 2

A.O. Smith Vs. Star Smith: Who owns the right over the word ‘Smith’?

The Delhi High Court addressed trademark infringement claims over the use of ‘Smith’ for identical water purification products. The decision highlights the assessment of dominant trademark elements and the likelihood of confusion among Indian consumers.

Read more about A.O. Smith Vs. Star Smith: Who owns the right over the word ‘Smith’?

Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) and Royalty Rates (Ericsson vs. Lava) – Part 1

The Delhi High Court’s judgment in Ericsson vs. Lava clarifies major legal standards for standard essential patents, FRAND royalties, and infringement in India. This case note examines the Court’s findings on patent validity, damages, and licensing practices in the telecom sector.

Read more about Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) and Royalty Rates (Ericsson vs. Lava) – Part 1

Court holds that FIELDMARSHAL Trademark belongs to PM Diesel, the Prior, Continuous and Legitimate User

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the FIELDMARSHAL trademark belongs to PM Diesel, recognising its prior, continuous, and legitimate use. Thukral’s claims were dismissed, and reliefs including actual litigation costs and registration of pending applications were granted to PM Diesel.

Read more about Court holds that FIELDMARSHAL Trademark belongs to PM Diesel, the Prior, Continuous and Legitimate User

Delhi High Court reverses Patent refusal, Highlights significance of procedural adherence in handling claims of PCT National phase applications.

The Delhi High Court overturned a patent refusal for a PCT national phase application, stressing the importance of procedural adherence in claim examination. The Court directed a fresh evaluation, emphasizing accurate application of legal provisions and detailed analysis of objections.

Read more about Delhi High Court reverses Patent refusal, Highlights significance of procedural adherence in handling claims of PCT National phase applications.