Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Image accompanying a blogpost on "Warner Bros. dries up the Doodstream.com!"

Warner Bros. dries up the Doodstream.com!

In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court ordered Doodstream.com to remove infringing content related to Warner Bros. and comply with Indian laws. The court emphasized the platform’s role in incentivizing piracy and the necessity for stricter compliance measures. Continue Reading Warner Bros. dries up the Doodstream.com!

Read more

High Court of Himachal Pradesh grants Boehringer Ingelheim an interim injunction against Eris Lifesciences for patent infringement of diabetes drug Empagliflozin

Boehringer secures Patent Injunction for its Diabetes Drug – Empagliflozin

On May 30, 2024, the High Court of Himachal Pradesh granted an interim injunction to Boehringer Ingelheim, restraining Eris Lifesciences from manufacturing, selling, or marketing Empagliflozin tablets due to patent infringement. The court emphasized the importance of maintaining scientific integrity and upheld the validity of Boehringer’s patent. Continue Reading Boehringer secures Patent Injunction for its Diabetes Drug – Empagliflozin

Read more

Madras High Court criticizes inconsistent patent examination in Industeel France case, emphasizing fair and thorough evaluation for inventors.

Patent examination should not kill the scientific temper of an inventor

The Madras High Court criticized inconsistent patent examination practices in Industeel France’s case, emphasizing the need for a fair and thorough evaluation process. The court ordered a de novo examination by a different Controller and stressed the importance of maintaining scientific temper. Continue Reading Patent examination should not kill the scientific temper of an inventor

Read more

Madras High Court clarifies that claim amendments in a patent application do not mean abandoning earlier claims. Learn about the court's decision in Genomatica Inc. vs Controller of Patents

New claims, Old claims, and Claim Amendments: Section 59 of the Patents Act

In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court clarified that amending claims in a patent application does not imply abandonment of earlier claims. The court directed that decisions should be based on the amended claims. This analysis was part of Genomatica Inc. vs Controller of Patents case. Continue Reading New claims, Old claims, and Claim Amendments: Section 59 of the Patents Act

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Renounced Riches, Not Rights! Court uploads Sanyasi's copyrights"

Renounced Riches, Not Rights! Court upholds Sanyasi’s copyrights

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, upholding Srila Prabhupada’s copyrights despite his status as a Sanyasi. The court decreed that Srila Prabhupada’s intellectual property rights were valid and had been rightfully assigned to the Trust. Continue Reading Renounced Riches, Not Rights! Court upholds Sanyasi’s copyrights

Read more

Monoclonal antibodies and Patents – How the Madras High Court interpreted Section 3(c)

Monoclonal antibodies and Patents – How the Madras High Court interpreted Section 3(c)

The Madras High Court clarified the interpretation of Section 3(c) in the context of monoclonal antibodies patent in Genmab A/S v. Assistant Controller of Patents. The court emphasized the importance of novelty and technical advancement for patent eligibility. Continue Reading Monoclonal antibodies and Patents – How the Madras High Court interpreted Section 3(c)

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "Authors, Copyright and Royalty Share : The Calcutta High Court gives clarity"

Authors, Copyright and Royalty Share : The Calcutta High Court gives clarity

The Calcutta High Court’s landmark decision in Vodafone v. Saregama clarifies the royalty rights of authors of literary and musical works. The ruling states that authors are entitled to royalties regardless of when their works were created or the nature of copyright ownership transfers. Continue Reading Authors, Copyright and Royalty Share : The Calcutta High Court gives clarity

Read more

Image accompanying blogpost on "All set for VOMISET : Court restores trademark and allows renewal beyond deadline"

All set for VOMISET : Court restores trademark and allows renewal beyond deadline

Indi Pharma Pvt Ltd successfully petitioned the High Court of Bombay to restore its trademark application for VOMISET and allow its renewal. The Court’s decision was based on the precedent set in the Motwane case, highlighting the importance of proper notification for trademark renewals. Continue Reading All set for VOMISET : Court restores trademark and allows renewal beyond deadline

Read more

Court Criticizes Patent Office for Using Outdated CRI Guidelines

Court criticizes Patent Office for using outdated CRI Guidelines

The Madras High Court criticized the Patent Office for using outdated CRI guidelines of 2016 instead of the revised 2017 guidelines in evaluating Microsoft’s patent application. The court emphasized the importance of assessing technical effect or contribution in CRIs without considering hardware. Continue Reading Court criticizes Patent Office for using outdated CRI Guidelines

Read more

Connect with Us

BananaIP Counsels

No.40, 3rd Main Road, JC Industrial Estate, Kanakapura Road, Bangalore – 560 062.

Telephone: +91-76250 93758+91-80-49536207 | +91-80-26860414/24/34
Email: contact@bananaip.com

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Checkboxes

© 2004-2024 BananaIP Counsels. All Rights Reserved.