+91-80-26860424 / 34

Call Us Today

LinkedIn

 

Author: BananaIP Reporter

BananaIP Counsels > Articles posted by BananaIP Reporter (Page 5)

Beer versus Whiskey- Beer Wins 8PM battle

The image depicts a beer stein full of beer. The image also reads Beer, with a byline 'All a man needs. Apart form sex'. This case talks about the tussle between beer companies for the mark 8 PM. Click on the image to read the full post.

This post was first published on September 24, 2011. RADICO KHAITAN LIMITED V. CARLSBERG INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, decided on 16th September, 2011 by Delhi High Court Facts:- The plaintiff- Radico Khaitan Ltd. has been continuously and extensively carrying on an established and reputed business in respect of manufacture and sale of alcoholic beverages in India, as well as numerous countries across the world directly by itself and through its affiliates, subsidiaries, licensees, etc. The plaintiff adopted the mark 8 PM in the year 1997 in relation to whiskey and has been extensively using the same since 1999. The Plaintiff is the Registered Proprietor...

Continue reading

Battle of Instant Photography

This post was published on August 20, 2014.

 

August 19 is celebrated as World Photography Day! Photography, in layman’s language, is an art of producing images using a camera. The history of recording images dates back to the late BC, though this cannot be substantiated. Later, in 1839, Louis Daguerre, a French artist and photographer, introduced Daguerreotype, the first publicly announced photographic process. In 1840, the first American patent (US 1582) was issued in photography to Mr. Alexander Wolcott, for his camera that worked on the Daguerreotype principle. Now, telling you about all patents related to photography would be tedious. So, let me tell you the story of an interesting patent battle that took place between two pioneers in photography in hopes of gaining dominance in the field of instant photography.

Court Re-Emphasizes the Exclusion of Generic Terms from Registration

The image depicts the Madras HC.

This post was first published on March 30, 2012. Recently Madras High Court has delivered a very interesting judgment on trademark infringement and passing off in the case of Rhizome Distilleries Pvt. Ltd Vs. Union Of India & Others on 16 February, 2012. The suit has been filed by Rhizome Distilleries Pvt. Ltd against four different Respondents. They are- 1. Union of India,  2. Intellectual Property Appellate Board,  3. The Registrar of Trade Marks,  4. Pernod Richard S.A. The petitioner company is a bottling and blending unit, which possesses recognized liquor brands in the market capturing middle and lower segments in the name...

Continue reading

Technology Transfer – The Indian Perspective!

This image depicts a transfer taking place between two people. This image is relevant because this post talks about the Indian perspective of technology transfer. Click on the image to view full post.

This post was published on September 15, 2014.

 

We hear a lot about technology transfer these days, particularly with Prime Minister Modi’s recent visits to Japan, with whom India is negotiating collaboration opportunities in the area of infrastructure, defense and energy. Technology transfer refers to the transfer, assignment or licensing of various forms of Intellectual Property developed by one person, organization, university or even a country to another. The reason for transfer is to promote public good through the development of IP into useful and usable goods or services that in turn, promote economic growth.

Leading universities, primarily from industrialized countries, generate rich IP which then is disseminated to society through private partnerships. The United States, being the primary example of an economy investing significantly into university based research and development, provides incentives to the university and to inventor(s) to jointly benefit from the commercialization of such innovations. The US passed the Bayh Dole Act in 1980 to speed up the process of commercializing federally funded university research. The Act fostered greater collaboration between universities and the private sector, leading to significant industrial growth.

A Patently Generic Win

This post was first published on April 23, 2012. In a landmark decision on a generic drug-maker’s ability to introduce a generic drug for uses not indicated on the branded product’s label, the US Supreme Court ruled in favour of Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, a unit of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, in its patent litigation against Novo Nordisk over Caraco’s generic version of Prandin, repaglinide tablets, a blood glucose lowering drug. The drug in question, Prandin, generically known as repaglinide, is used for treatment of Type-2 diabetes. The drug is approved for three different uses, out of which Novo had valid patent on one....

Continue reading

Role of Third Parties in Patent Grant Process

This post was published on July 21, 2014.

 

The subject of today’s topic would probably leave a patent applicant feeling a bit like the reigns are slipping. A patent is not a piece of cake to acquire. The right owner of the invention be it an inventor or an applicant has to prove themselves beyond any doubt. It is the basic right of every individual to oppose the grant of any patent, in cases where such a grant would seem detrimental to a third party. Hence, it would be a justifiable opportunity for third parties to intervene in the procedure of patent grant.

Opposition

Under the Indian Patent Law, Opposition can be made twice during the life of a patent application. First is the Pre-grant representation under section 25(1) wherein any person may challenge the application for grant of a patent. Pre-grant opposition acts as a defensive shield to confirm the validity of patent applications before patents are granted. Post grant opposition under section 25(2) may be made only by any person interested at any time after the grant of patent but before the expiry of a period of one year from the date of publication of grant of patent.

Abraham Lincoln – the Patent Enthusiast!

This image depicts a portrait of Abraham Lincoln

This post was first published on March 5th, 2014.   Abraham Lincoln was the 16th President of the United States, well known for his fight against slavery. Before entering into active politics, Mr. Lincoln was a practicing lawyer who tried to defend the rights of slaves. His continued interest and effort in this front probably helped him gain the trust of his countrymen, which in turn helped him build a successful political career and become the President of the United States in the year 1861. Thereafter, his struggle for abolishing slavery ended in success and slavery was abolished across the country. All these chapters of...

Continue reading

Ideas, Concepts, Scripts & Stories – Protecting Ideas in the Entertainment Industry Part IV

This Image depicts a seedling is being protected by two hands on it This Image is relevant as the article deals with the Copyrights and protection of ideas. Click on this Image for more Information.

This post was published on August 08, 2014.

 

In this article we will discuss another case about how to protect ideas in the Entertainment Industry. Just to recap the previous posts in this series can be found here, here and here.

Urmi Juvekar Chiang, Indian Inhabitant, Mumbai vs. (1) Global Broadcast News Limited, Uttar Pradesh; (2) Network 18 Fincap Private Limited, Uttar Pradesh

The Plaintiff, in this case, was a scriptwriter and she had written a concept for reality television for solving civic problems. She asserted that the programme would follow the chosen protagonists through the quagmire of bureaucracy and conflicting interests and destructive attitudes as they tried to solve a civic problem of their choice.

The Plaintiff sent her concept to a certain Mrs. Rasika Tyagi (one of the Defendants). She and a person who agreed to act as her producer, Mr. Arjun Gauirsaria, had a detailed discussion with the Defendants about the concept that the Plaintiff had written. The Defendants, after some discussion did not follow up on the negotiations. Soon enough, the Plaintiff was in for a shock to see that a television programme with a concept very similar to theirs, was being telecast by the Defendants’ channel.

Pepsodent’s Attaaaack on Colgate Continues

First Publication Date: 18th September, 2009.   In furtherance to our earlier blog here relating to the advertisement war between Colgate and Pepsodent and comparative advertising, the Delhi High Court recently, on 21st August 2013, denied grant of interim injunction against Hindustan Unilever Limited ('HUL'/Pepsodent) and held that Court was not persuaded at this stage to hold the impugned TV advertisement or the impugned printed advertisement by HUL to be disparaging of or denigrating the product ‘Colgate Dental Cream Strong Teeth’ of Colgate-Palmolive. Colgate-Palmolive (“Colgate”) brought an action against HUL relating to the advertisements published by HUL regarding Colgate’s toothpaste Colgate Dental Cream...

Continue reading

Introduction to Well-Known Trademarks and Trademark Dilution

This image depicts several well known brand logos such as McDonald's and Coca-Cola. This post is about the transborder reputation of well known marks. Click on the image to read the full post.

    This post was first published on June 30th, 2014.   Generally, trademark protection is limited to the protection against unauthorized use of a trademark on identical or similar goods or services. The deceptive similarity and likelihood of confusing elements are not applicable in cases where an alleged conflicting mark is used in respect of dissimilar and/or unrelated goods and services. For example, the use of the mark KODAK for hotels or catering services would not amount to trademark infringement under the provisions of Trademark law. However, this is not the case in all situations. Article 6 Bis of the Paris Convention for protection...

Continue reading
css.php
Speak with an IP Expert Today
close slider