+91 44 28120000

Call Us for an Appointment

[language-switcher]
 

patent infringement Tag

SURANA & SURANA > Posts tagged "patent infringement"

IPR NEWS – SEPTEMBER

Renowned Authors, Including Grisham and Martin, Sue OpenAI Over Copyright Concerns Seventeen prominent authors, including John Grisham, George R.R. Martin, and Jodi Picoult, have filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging copyright infringement. The authors claim that OpenAI's language model, GPT-3, is being used to generate content that mimics their writing style, posing a threat to their intellectual property. The lawsuit contends that OpenAI's GPT-3 generates text that closely resembles the authors' work, potentially leading to confusion among readers and devaluing their unique literary voices. The authors seek to protect their creative works and maintain control over their intellectual property rights. OpenAI...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – JULY

Overstock to rebrand as Bed Bath & Beyond after buying brand's intellectual property In a transformative acquisition, online retail giant Overstock has revealed plans to undergo a complete rebranding, adopting the name of the renowned home goods retailer Bed Bath & Beyond after purchasing the brand's intellectual property. This strategic move aims to bolster Overstock's market position and broaden its product offerings. By aligning itself with Bed Bath & Beyond's well-established reputation for quality home essentials and leveraging its name recognition, Overstock seeks to tap into a loyal customer base and enhance its competitive edge in the retail sector. Barbie Vs BRBY Mattel...

Continue reading

PATENT PROTECTION IN THE FIELD OF NANOBIOTECHNOLOGY

PATENT PROTECTION IN THE FIELD OF NANOBIOTECHNOLOGY

Nihaarika Prudhvi, Trainee - Intellectual Property Rights Practice INTRODUCTION: Since we live in a scientific era, it is important that we understand several aspects of rapidly developing field of nanobiotechnology, including patent protection. Nanoscience is the study of marvels and manipulation of material at the nanoscale, in substance an extension of being lores into the nanoscale. Accoutrements reduced to the nanoscale can suddenly show veritably different parcels compared to what they show on a macroscale. With Nanotechnology, a large set of accoutrements with distinct parcels (optic, electrical or glamorous) can be fabricated. The lower a nanoparticle gets, the larger its relative face area...

Continue reading

PATENTING OF MICROORGANISMS & GENES

PATENTING OF MICROORGANISMS & GENES

VERSHA YADAV Patent Agent /Patent Associate, Surana & Surana International Attorneys ABSTRACT In the 21st century, it is becoming increasingly clear that access to cutting-edge technologies and discoveries can be the difference between progress and failure in the business world. This has led to a rise in patenting of various microorganisms, genes, and viruses.  Although, the government of India permitted patenting of microorganisms in India under the Patents Bill (Second Amendment) on 14th May 2002. The government of India has so far granted many patents for microorganisms, and various pharmaceutical companies and research institutes have filed an application for patenting of microorganisms. But patenting...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 6th NOV – 11th NOV

CONDE NAST v. DRAKE Conde Nast, the owner of Vogue magazine, on November 7 has filed a lawsuit against Drake and 21 Savage for using the Vogue trademark without authorization to promote their new album "Her Loss." Conde Nast claimed that the rappers' promotional campaign was "entirely" based on the unauthorized use of Vogue trademarks and false claims that they would appear on the magazine's upcoming cover with the "love and support" of longtime editor-in-chief Anna Wintour, including to their more than 135 million social media followers. Conde Nast said that the defendants also produced a fake issue of Vogue that...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 30th OCT – 5th NOV

LOUIS VUITTON MALLETIER V. FUTURETIMES TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS The Delhi High Court on November 3 has granted Louis Vuitton Malletier, a French luxury fashion brand, Rs. 20 lakhs in fees in its trademark infringement case against Club Factory, a Chinese e-commerce platform that was outlawed in India in 2021. Louis Vuitton's attorney informed the court on November 3 that the plaintiff only wishes to pursue costs in the case, despite the fact that the lawsuit was officially decided on March 24 when a permanent injunction was granted against the Chinese website and it was now scheduled for ex-parte...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 16th OCT – 22nd OCT

K. N. GOVINDACHARYA  vs SECRETARY GENERAL & ORS On October 17, the Supreme Court issued notice in response to a petition asking for instructions to protect the Court's copyright over video recordings of court proceedings that are live-streamed on websites like YouTube. The application also aimed to stop live-stream material from being used for profit. In the application, it was requested that the live-streaming closely adhere to the ruling in Centre for Accountability and Systemic Change (CASC) v. Secretary General &Ors., (2018) 10 SCC 639. Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Chief Justice UU Lalit made up the panel that heard the...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 9th OCT – 15th OCT

ALLERGAN INC AND ANR. v. CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS DESIGNS AND TRADE MARKS AND ANR. The Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trademarks has received criticism from the Delhi High Court on October 12 for failing to notify the International Bureau of the World Intellectual Property Organization of the filing of two entities' opposition to the registration of international trademarks within the time frame required by the Trademarks Act. The order passed by the Controller General was contested by the two petitioners, who had filed oppositions in response to publication of the international registration of the trademarks. The petitioners made the...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 2nd OCT – 8th OCT

QUALCOMM v. APPLE Despite the fact that the two tech titans' legal battle over three smartphone patents had been resolved, the U.S. Supreme Court on October 3, once more declined to consider Apple Inc.'s request to resurrect the case. In 2017, Qualcomm filed a lawsuit against Apple in federal court in San Diego, alleging that the company's iPhones, iPads, and Apple Watches violated many mobile technology patents. The lawsuit concerned a larger international conflict between the two digital behemoths. At the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Apple contested the legality of the patents at...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 25th SEP – 1st OCT

MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC V. MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP An U.S. appeals court ruled that a patent held by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. for its diabetes medications Januvia and Janumet is valid, rejecting a challenge to the patent made by generic manufacturer Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. The Court did not agree with Viatris Inc.'s Mylan's argument that the invention was invalid because to an earlier patent and other publications. On September 29, the Federal Circuit concurred with the board that the patent was valid. It denied Mylan's claims that the earlier works Mylan identified would have rendered Merck's patent apparent. LIVE LAW...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 18TH SEP – 24TH SEP

INDIAMART INTERMESH LIMITED v. MR SAMEER SAMIM KHAN  & Ors. The petitioner IndiaMart filed a suit for permanent injunction against the fraudulent website https://india-mart.co/ who was fraudulently offering jobs under the plaintiff’s name. The IndiaMart is a registered trademark and also the registered domain www.indiamart.com way back. The High Court observed that “Plaintiff has made out a prima facie case for ex parte ad interim injunction. Balance of convenience lies in favour of the Plaintiff. If the activities of Defendant are not nipped in the bud, irreparable injury would be caused not only to the Plaintiff, but also to public at...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 11TH SEP – 17TH SEP

DIPALI SIKAND AND ORS v. SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONIC PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR. A temporary injunction prohibiting Samsung India and one Story Experiences from using the trademark "CONCIERGE," which is being used by the Concierge conglomerate made up of Lesconcierges Services Pvt. Ltd. and Club Concierge Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., was issued by a civil court in Bengaluru on September 13th. Dipali Sikand, the founder of the plaintiff company, asserts ownership of the "CONCIERGE" trademark from May 2016.According to the claim, the plaintiff company created the 'President Club' loyalty programme for Samsung as part of the 'CONCIERGE' service with the intention of...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 28TH AUG – 3RD SEP

SONY MUSIC INITIATES COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND BREACH OF CONTRACT LAWSUIT AGAINST TRILLER Sony sued the platform seeking damages as the application failed to pay the license fees agreed upon back in March 2022 after which it considered that their deal was terminated. Whereas, the platform still allowed sharing of music owned by Sony in the Application which Sony claims to have contributed to Copyright infringement. It is pertinent to mention here that the platform has already been in disputes especially in relation to payments and licenses, with a number of companies including the Universal group. GI REGISTRATION OF KASHMIR NAMDA AND GABBA...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 14TH AUG – 20TH AUG

FLIPKART INTERNET PRIVATE LTD. v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. The respondent company Sanash Impex Pvt. Ltd have procured the authorized rights to sell the cosmetic products of a Czech based company ‘DC DERMACOL’ in India . A FIR was filed against Flipkart by the complainant for trademark infringement of their mark ‘DC DERMACOL’ by unauthorized resellers who were selling fake products in Flipkart and Amazon. The complainant also alleged that this act was committed by them in collaboration and connivance with Flipkart, thereby accusing Flipkart of enabling the sale of fake DC DERMACOL cosmetics and charging the resellers...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 7TH AUG-13TH AUG

DFM FOODS LIMITED v. CHANDEL STORE & ORS. The plaintiff is the owner of the registered trademark of 'CRAX CURLS' and 'CURLS' which is a type of corn-based snack launched in December 2016. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant even though changed their trademark from ‘CURLS’ TO ‘KURVY’, the packaging of the same, both before and after name change is deceptively similar with that of the plaintiffs. The Court held that the plaintiff has prima facie case in their favor because customers can easily be confused and cheated since the goods are of low price. Therefore, restrained the defendant from using...

Continue reading

IPR NEWS – WEEKLY UPDATES FROM 17TH JULY- 23RD JULY

Marico Limited vs Dabur India Limited The Petitioner initiated a suit for infringement and disparagement in relation to the advertisement published by Dabur in various newspapers containing a disclaimer that implies that the Device/ Label mark of ‘Nihar’ which is a part of their advertisement belongs to the petitioner. It is therefore evident that the respondent was aware that the petitioner owns the particular mark. The petitioner claims that the pictorial impact of the advertisements demeans and disparages the petitioner's product and the comparison between the products conveying to the audience that the product of the petitioner is ineffective has amounted...

Continue reading

IP NEWS WEEKLY UPDATE – 9 FEB 2022

Moonshine Technology Pvt Ltd v. Ticktok Games Pvt Ltd The Plaintiff initiated the suit against the defendant for the use of the mark ‘BAAZI’. The plaintiff claimed its marks containing the term BAAZI to be well- known and to have attained worldwide recognition. The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant was a subsequent dishonest adopter of the mark BAAZI especially in relation to gaming services. The Plaintiff had also established that the Defendant was a direct competitor to the Plaintiff’s company as the Director of the Defendant company had been a customer of Plaintiff and claims that the usage by the Defendant...

Continue reading