The High Court of Madras, in a recent decision, considered the popular issue of interface between copyright and design protection in case of an artistic work and this order forms the basis for discussion in the article published in this issue of IPR Amicus.
The ‘Ratio Decidendi’ column analyses the Delhi High Court order holding that drawing/design which is an artistic work under the Copyright Act, as also under the Designs Act, 2000, if not registered under the latter Act, will have protection under the Copyright Act only till the design is used not more than 50 times by an industrial process to produce an article. An important judgment of Rajasthan High Court to the effect that there would not be any infringement of trademark when label mark was registered with condition of disclaimer disentitling exclusive use of word, is also covered in this issue.
New Nuggets portion has three interesting reports – the first one on a case dealt with by the district court in Louisiana relating to a novel problem of copying of questions of an examination. The second report is on the order relating to registration of ‘tourbillion’ before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) of the United States. Legislation on labelling GM foods is the third story which readers can enjoy in this issue of IPR Amicus.
