Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan 律师事务所An ISO 9001 / 27001 certified law firm

知识产权新闻

搜索 起始日 到期日
Composite suit of Infringement of design and passing off, permissible


20th December 2018

Five Judges Bench of the Delhi High Court has allowed a composite suit for infringement of registered design and passing-off. It noted that if there is a common question of law and facts, the joinder of causes of action can take place under Order II Rule 3 of the CPC to avoid multiplicity
.
The Court in the case of 

Counterfeit goods – E-commerce website when not merely an intermediary


12th December 2018

Observing that the website guaranteed that ‘all products are 100% genuine’ and that it was not taking precautions to stop sale of counterfeits, while having a separate category for ‘replicas’, Delhi High Court has held that Shopclues.com is not merely an intermediary.

Benefit of Section 79 of the I...

Cause of action under Designs Act distinct from that in a trademark suit


6th December 2018

Delhi High Court has held that in a case where an infringement suit has already been filed under the Designs Act, there is no need to obtain the leave of the court to introduce a separate proceeding in the case of passing-off of trademark. 

Reliance on Order II Rule 2 CPC in this regard was rejected by the court. Plea...

Registrar of Trademarks should classify Indian Goods & Services


15th November 2018

Considering enormity of litigations touching upon trademark infringement, Madras High Court has stated that it is high time that the Registrar of Trademark publishes alphabetical index as per Rule 20(2) of the Trademark Rules with class wise classification of the goods and services including that of the Indian origin.

The...

IPAB can hear copyright matter in absence of Member Copyright


8th October

The Delhi High Court has held that though it may be apposite for the government to appoint Member Technical (Copyright), a vacancy in this regard does not impinges upon jurisdiction of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) constituted under Section 83 of the Trade Marks Act.

Setting aside the Order passed by Registrar...

Territorial jurisdiction of court - Trademark s.134 and Copyright s.62 are not in exclusion to s.20 of CPC


1st October 

Delhi High Court has held that territorial jurisdiction of a Court in a trademark action could be invoked where there is use ‘upon’ or ‘in relation’ to goods. It noted that the phrase ‘in relation to’ includes advertising, promotion, etc.

The court was of the v...

Patent in eco-friendly efficient vehicle – Absence of novelty


21st August

The Calcutta High Court has held that the patent in “a fuel cell system and an efficient eco-friendly vehicle mounted with fuel cell system” did not involve any novel invention or any enhancement/advancement of existing technology.

The High Court in this regard in the case Jasper Motors v. Basantee Batte...

Copyright in image of ‘Lightning McQueen’ protected from commercial misuse


17th August

In a case of character merchandising, Delhi High Court has granted permanent injunction retraining defendants from selling goods bearing image of device/work in “Lightning McQueen”, a character from the Disney movie called “Cars”.

It noted that said device is a copyrighted character and under Copyright Ac...

Trademark – No monopoly over entire class of goods


16th August 

The Supreme Court has held that proprietor of trademark cannot enjoy monopoly over entire class of goods particularly when he is not using said trademark in respect of certain goods falling under same class.

The Apex Court in this regard set aside the High Court and IPAB orders, thus restoring Registrar’s order allow...

Trademark – No infringement if mark not used as trademark


06-08-2018

Delhi High Court has denied interim injunction against use of trade name MERCYKIND which was alleged to be infringing the mark MANKIND and also its series of marks with suffix/prefix KIND. The court in this regard noted that plaintiff had taken different stand before the Registrar, in defence to a claim for infringement, where its several marks incorporating wo...

Copyright of producer in cinematographic work when cannot be restricted


06-08-2018

A Division Bench of the Madras High Court has held that once the ‘performer’ in an advertisement film (cinematograph work) has agreed to vesting of copyright in the producer of the film, the said performer, by way of an agreement, cannot curtail or restrict the right of exploitation of the work by the producer for a time period which is less than th...

Trademark - No passing off for using mark SPLITVIEW


06-08-2018

Observing that the elements of irreparable injury and balance of convenience were not satisfied, Delhi High Court on dated 4-7-2018 has rejected grant of an interim injunction in a case involving use of word SPLITVIEW in software products. In this case involving passing-off, it was observed that plaintiff was not entitled to interim injunction if they do not cl...

Page(s) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 
若需要较早的文档请参阅档案部分
搜索 团队成员
搜索 团队成员
按名字字母顺序
A|B|C|D|E|F|G|H|I|J
K|L|M|N|O|P|Q|R|S|T
U|V|W|X|Y|Z
Enter at least a name or a keyword to search