Sound Board

Our thoughts and views on the practice of Intellectual Property in India and around the world.

Copyright is a unique animal among the various types of intellectual property. Usually, copyright vests in a work as soon as it is created, and registration of a copyright is not mandatory to obtain some form of legal protection. It is this aspect of copyright that gives rise to various types of copyleft and permissive licenses of copyrighted works, because it gives the creator of a work rights over their work immediately upon creation.

The word “copyright” is a legal term which has become entrenched in everyday conversation because of its ubiquity and widespread use. Copyleft, on the other hand, is a more obscure term which refers to a particular type of copyright license.

The business was with respect to hard boiled candies and the trademark had gradually acquired popularity among the public since then. The candies under the tradename PULSE were sold in various flavours inter alia were Kaccha Aam, Guava and Orange and it was packed in a unique way having distinct layout, get up and colour scheme.

On July 8, 2019 The Delhi High Court decided that a copyright infringement occurs when there is no ‘Originality’ under Section 13(3)(a) and Section 2(d) of the Copyright Act, 1957. To decide this, reliance was placed on two other cases- R.G. Anand v. M/s Deluxe Films and Ors., (1978) 4 SCC 118 and MRF limited v. Metro Tyres Limited, CS (COMM) 753/2017.

Recently, a batch of seven suits for injunction were filed in the Delhi High Court by Amway, Modicare, Oriflame against 1MG, Amazon, Flipkart and few other E-commerce entities for injunction to restrain  direct sellers from selling  the Plaintiffs’ products on the E-commerce platforms without the former’s consent. .

In the world of construction, an architect holds a remarkable position. An architect quite often turns to be the ultimate decision maker on any project, a question then arises would that give, the architect, as the creator and legal ‘author’ of a building a ‘right to object’ to the modification or destruction of their work by the owner of the building? In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court has answered the question in negative.

The Intellectual Property Appellate Board recently held hearings for trademark matters in July 2019. The cause list was sent on a rather short notice, and came as a surprise to many advocates since the IPAB currently doesn’t have a technical member for trademarks, and therefore should not be hearing trademark matters under the law. We’ll be taking a look at this in closer detail in this post.

The current case is a classic story of conscious copying of the domain name. Before proceeding further, dealing with the meaning and definition of the word domain name is important. Domain name is the name of the website. In simple words, just like how every person is attributed with a specific and unique name, similarly, the websites too have a name of their own! And this ‘name’ is called as the Domain Name.

The Indian Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade issued a public notice on June 24, 2019, along with a draft guideline for comments from stakeholders (within 30 days) on the peppy tagline “Invaluable Treasure of Incredible India” and a common tri-color logo for GI certified products.

In a recent judgement, the Delhi High Court set a precedent by issuing India’s first-ever ‘dynamic injunction’ against websites who were deemed to be infringing upon the rights of copyright holders.