20 July 2019

Sticky

Patents May be Relatively New to Indians, but Inventions are Not

The image depicts a sack containing cotton seeds.

This post was first published on 10th March, 2014. It gives the SiNApSE blog Team great pleasure to bring forth to our readers a 1971 US patent in which Mr. C. T. Dwarakanath from CFTRI, Mysore, was an inventor. Mr. Dwarakanath was a co-inventor in the patent entitled, "Process for reduction of aflatoxin content of oilseed meals by ozonization", bearing number 3,592,641. The invention was conceived and reduced to practice during one of his visits to Louisiana, USA on a project for the agricultural department during the years 1965-66. The patent was in fact assigned to the US Government, Department of...

20 July 2019

0 Cmnts

Sticky

Were the brothers (W)right?

Posted by BananaIP Reporter

in Intellectual Property, Patents

The image depicts the Wright Brothers walking together.

This post was first published on 20th March, 2014. Last week, my post was about the role of communication technology in making different regions of the world “excess able” from “access able”. It is important to bear in mind the role played by transportation systems in nullifying the effects of physical distance. Though different transportation means such as roadways, airways and waterways are available, when it comes to covering long distances in short time periods, aviation a.k.a. air transportation is one of the most convenient modes of transportation. The Wright brothers began efforts to invent a motor powered aircraft in the year 1899....

20 July 2019

1 Cmnt

Sticky

Inebriated @ 8

Posted by BananaIP Reporter

in Intellectual Property, Trademarks

The image is a bottle of liquor 8 PM. The post is about a Delhi High Court decision about trademark in numbers. Click on image to view post.

This post was first published on December 22, 2011. In a very recent decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd. v. Radico Khaitan (decided on 20th December, 2011), a division bench revisited the ever debated question of trademark rights in numbers. A quick glance over the facts reveals that Radico has been the registered proprietor of the trademark '8 PM' for whiskey and other liquor. In February, 2011, Carlsberg launched Beer under the mark 'Palone 8' and as a result was sued by Radico (detailed analysis of the facts and earlier order of the...

20 July 2019

0 Cmnts

Sticky

Threatened Co-existence of Breeders Rights and Patent Rights

Posted by BananaIP Reporter

in Intellectual Property, Patents, Plant Varieties

This image depicts two people trying to join a puzzle. This image is relevant as their is a threat to the co-existence of the Breeder's rights and patent rights. Click on this image for more information

This post was last published on September 1st, 2014.

Innovation has always been focused on existing plant varieties which scientists use for improvements and for which breeders’ exemption (the right to use protected plant varieties in their research and claim ownership of the results) is granted. But patents don’t provide for a breeders’ exemption and researchers will have to pay for access to patented materials used in their research if they are allowed access at all. Patent stacking has become common practice – it refers to taking out patents for different aspects of a single innovation, forcing several royalty applications and payments.

From the very beginning Plant Variety Protection Law has contained a special provision that the breeder’s rights shall not extend to acts done for the purpose of breeding, or discovering and developing other plant varieties. It already appeared in Art. 5(3) of the 1961 UPOV Convention and can still be found in Art. 15(1)(iii) of the 1991 UPOV Convention and in Art. 15(c) of Regulation 2100/94 on Community Plant Variety Rights [1994] OJ L227/1. It speaks for itself that this rule has also been laid down in many national Plant Variety Protection regulations ever since.

20 July 2019

0 Cmnts

Sticky

Is Coke’s Formulation Still a Trade Secret?

Posted by BananaIP Reporter

in Trade Secrets

This image describes a can of Coca Cola. This image is relevant because this post talks about whether or not Coca Cola's trade secret is still a trade secret. Click on the image to view full post.

This post was first published on February 16, 2011. Coca Cola's secret formulation is the most cited example to elucidate the business value of trade secrets. Coca Cola has been taking stringent measures to protect the secrecy of its formulation and it is believed that the formulation makes it the most popular soft drink in the world. Recent news reports seem to suggest that Coke's formulation is not a trade secret any more. Alleged claims of a weekly public radio show broadcasting organization, the “Thisamericanlife.org” of finding the top secret recipe of making Coca Cola has created quite a stir. The guarded...

19 July 2019

1 Cmnt

Sticky

Myriad Genetics Case : Genetic Patentability

Posted by BananaIP Reporter

in Intellectual Property, Patents

This post was first published on 19th August, 2013. Finally, I have managed to read the Myriad Genetics case at peace. Off late, setting out to analyze the US Supreme Court's patent decisions has become a much easier task than earlier. Firstly, the Court has gotten clearer in the recent past, and secondly, it is no longer a one sided patent friendly Court. The decisions of the Court in KSR, Bilski, Mayo, and finally this case indicate that trend. In the backdrop, the decision in Myriad Genetics was not a surprise to a keen follower, and, upholds the inherent lacuna in...

19 July 2019

1 Cmnt

Sticky

Demystifying the Evergreen myth

Posted by BananaIP Reporter

in Intellectual Property, Patents

This post was first published on 19th May, 2014. Evergreening, known in the politically-correct-circles as “Life Cycle management” of a drug, is the concept of extending the exclusivity term rendered to a pharmaceutical patent through legal and business measures. Contrary to existing myths and notions, Evergreening does not stop an interested party from exploiting the invention of an expiring patent. It is purely a business strategy to introduce and position newer products (sometimes patented) into the market so as to prolong consumer interest, before the generic players flood the market. After the expiry of the term of exclusivity granted to a drug...

18 July 2019

0 Cmnts

Sticky

Public Use Exemption for Patentability

Posted by BananaIP Reporter

in Intellectual Property, Patents

This post was last published on July 18th, 2014. Today we will take a look at two patentability cases with a very similar premise, the premise being if the public use of an invention bars its patentability. What these two cases have in common is only the premise, and with a little scrutiny, we will see how contrasting the cases actually were. 1. Egbert v. Lippmann, 104 U.S. 333 (1881) In the year 1855, Samuel Barnes, designed corset springs, i.e., the springs that hold a corset together, for his wife who had expressed her dissatisfaction with the existing corset binders that were not...

17 July 2019

0 Cmnts

Sticky

Keeping Secrets from the Patent Office? Think Again!

Posted by BananaIP Reporter

in Intellectual Property, Patents

This post was first published on 17th July, 2014. The Indian Patents Act, 1970 obligates an applicant under Section 8, Rule 12 to furnish information and submit an undertaking regarding foreign application or foreign filing. Under this section, an applicant has to submit details of the application filed 'in any country outside India in respect of the same or substantially the same invention' as required under section 8(1)(a); and an undertaking stating that the Applicant will keep the Controller informed of the application particulars till the time of grant as required under sub-section 8(1)(b). The only guideline available for meeting such an obligation...

15 July 2019

0 Cmnts

Sticky

Novartis Case Review

Posted by BananaIP Reporter

in Intellectual Property

This Post was first published on 15th May, 2013. NOVARTIS AG (APPELLANT) Vs. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS (RESPONDENTS) Decided by the Supreme Court of India, CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 2706-2716 OF 2013. Brief Facts The Appellant, Novartis, filed an application for patent in 1998 for a crystalline salt form of Imatinib and its use in cancer treatment. It specifically claimed the methanesulfonic acid addition salt form of the compound, Imatinib, called as Imatinib Mesylate (commonly referred to as Glivac or Glivec), in its beta crystalline form, which is non-needle shaped, having better flow properties, thus better processible, less hygroscopic and more thermodynamically stable, thus better...

Author: BananaIP Reporter

SOME OF OUR CLIENTS