The office of Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademark (CGPDTM) issued a notice informing about the organization of a virtual public meeting for brainstorming on the new Form 27. The meeting will be organized on July 29 at 4:30 and can be joined by using the open house meeting link (can be accessed from here). While the move to organize the public meeting should be appreciated, the extremely short notice (of merely 4 days!) may be an issue for ..read more

Right on the heels of Tejaswini’s post on the Indian Patent Office’s E-Cigarettes patent rejection order, we are pleased to bring to you this guest post by Bharathwaj Ramakrishnan assessing the viability of the argument that the rejection order’s rationale violated India’s international commitments. Bharathwaj is a 3rd year LLB Student at RGSOIPL, IIT Kharagpur and loves books and IP. His previous post can be accessed here. Does the Indian Patent Office Rejection Order on E-Cigarettes Violate International Treaties? A ..read more

In light of the news surrounding the possibility of implementation of strict measures against Look Alike Sound Alike (LASA) drugs, we are pleased to bring to you this discussion by Aditya Bhargava. Aditya is a third-year law student at NLSIU Bangalore. He is interested in intellectual property, AI regulation and tech law. His previous posts can be accessed here. Image from this paper authored by Lohmeyer et. al.Drug Doppelgängers: Unveiling the Dangers of Look-Alike, Sound-Alike (LASA) Medications By Aditya Bhargava Imagine a scenario where you walk into a shoe store asking for running sn ..read more

Claiming affection towards their sibling as the justification for adopting a deceptively similar ‘Adidas’ mark, the defendant in Adidas v. Keshav Tulsiani pleaded honest adoption of the impugned mark as a defense against trademark infringement allegations. Highlighting this interesting argument, SpicyIP intern Rishabh Deshpande discusses the Delhi High Court judgement passed in this case. Rishabh Deshpande is a 3rd year B.A.LLB. student from WBNUJS, Kolkata. Image from hereAdidas v. Keshav H. Tulsiani & Ors: A Case of Skewed Contentions By Rishabh Deshpande Recently on July 19, 2024, in a ..read more

Image from here Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC v. Assistant Controller of Patents marks what may be Madras HC’s first authoritative decision on the patentability of a computer program, in this case, involving command surfaces u/s. 3(k). In this post, first, I will discuss the facts constituting the case. Then, I will discuss whether MHC’s understanding aligns or deviates from DHC’s jurisprudence over the last five years. Then, I engage with MHC’s observation that ‘enablement’ is not a relevant inquiry when deciding the patentability of computer program u/s. 3(k). Lastly, I ..read more

We are pleased to bring to you this sponsored post by QuickCompany about the new update to their Trademark Watch software. For more details, read on below. Trademark Watch: AI Powered TM Management by LegalTech StartUp QuickCompany, India’s most popular Trademark Search Engine has introduced a new update to its Trademark Watch Software. The Web Based Application allows you to manage a Portfolio of 1000s of Brands with a single agent. How Does This Help me as a Trademark Attorney? Fastest and Most Accurate Trademark Search  With extensive use of Search Technology we are able to do differen ..read more

The single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of J. Mini Pushkarna on 4 July 2024 passed an order in Phillip Morris Products SA v. Assistant Controller Of Patents And Design accepting  an appeal against the Controller’s decision rejecting a patent application for “aerosol generating article with multi material susceptor.” The rejection had been based on the invention being “contrary to public order or morality or which causes serious prejudice to human, animal or plant life or health or to the environment” under Section 3(b) of the Indian Patent Act, 1970. The rejection of th ..read more

Image from here Salaam … Recently, I met Prashant Reddy who shared his experience of the 2018 WIPO-WTO colloquium for Teachers of IP from Developing Countries and Countries in Transition. While I was planning to save my experience in writing, meeting Prashant motivated me to share my experience of the 42nd ATRIP Congress with all our readers. My hope is twofold: Firstly, to encourage scholars, particularly from the Global South, to participate in next year’s Congress and leave their mark. This is a way to join the discourse and eventually contribute to it. Secondly, to provide a personal accou ..read more

Image from here Namaskar … I am back with the “Sifting Through SpicyIP Pages” series! Apologies for the long delay; life got busier for some undesirable reasons. But things have finally gotten better, and this blogger is back. Mind you, I haven’t returned with just one post. Nope! I did two rounds this time – March and April to compensate for the wait. This is the “Marchs” Sift; the “Aprils” edition is here.  As we dive into the 10th post of this series since June 2023, don’t forget to check out the previously explored pages of Junes, Julys, Augusts, Septembers, Octobers, November, Decemb ..read more

The Madras High Court, vide judgement dated 3 July 2024 in University of Ulm v. Asst. Controller of Patents and Designs, came down heavily on the IPO for its shoddy order rejecting the patent application filed by the appellant. The judgment raises serious concerns regarding the quality of functioning of the patent office. Facts In the given case, the University of Ulm (Germany) filed a patent application (Application No.645/CHENP/2011 filed on 31.01.2011) concerning use of Opioids or Opioid Mimetics for the Treatment of Resistant Cancer Patients. The appellant filed various prior art ..read more