Transforming Dimension of IPR Challenges for New Age Libraries
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Contributing Firm Anand and Anand Advocates Authors Munish Mehra
India Contributing firm Anand And Anand Advocates Authors Munish Mehra Associate Priyanka Kher Associate 157 India Anand And Anand Advocates 1. Legal framework • the district court’s jurisdiction to decide infringement and passing-off actions; and • stringent penalties for offences. National The Trademarks Act 1999 brought the Indian The act has also removed the provisions on statutory framework into line with worldwide defensive registration. trends and met India’s obligations under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of International Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs). Innovative India is a party to the following international interpretations of the Trademarks Act 1999 by the treaties and conventions: courts have expanded the scope of trademark • the Paris Convention for the Protection of rights and developed jurisprudence on Industrial Property; trademark law. • the TRIPs Agreement; • the Vienna Codification for Graphic Marks The Trademarks Act 1999 came into force in (although India is not a signatory); and 2003, repealing the Trade and Merchandise • the Nice Classification (Seventh Edition) for Marks Act 1958. It introduced sweeping Classification of Goods and Services changes to trademark law, including (although India is not a signatory). provisions for: • the registration of service marks and collective marks; 2. Unregistered marks • the filing of multi-class applications; • the recognition of shapes, goods, packaging and colour combinations as registrable Protection subject matter; In addition to statutory protection to registered • the abolishment of Part B of the register and trademarks, the act protects unregistered marks. of the need for disclaimers; This has its roots in the traditional common law • an increased term of registration and renewal system under the tort of passing off. -
Handbook on Intellectual Property Rights in India
HANDBOOK ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN INDIA Rajkumar S. Adukia B. Com. (Hons.), FCA, ACS, AICWA, LL.B, Dip.IFR (UK), MBA Mobile +91 98200 61049/+91 93230 61049 Fax +91 22 26765579 Email [email protected] www.carajkumarradukia.com http://rishabhacademy.com PREFACE Intellectual property rights (IPR) have become important in the face of changing trade environment which is characterized by global competition, high innovation risks, short product cycle, need for rapid changes in technology, high investments in research and development (R&D), production and marketing and need for highly skilled human resources. Regardless of what product an enterprise makes or what service it provides, it is likely that it is regularly using and creating a great deal of intellectual property. There is an emergent need for enterprises and professionals to systematically consider the steps required for protecting, managing and enforcing intellectual property rights, so as to get the best possible commercial results from its ownership. This book provides an insight into the laws related to intellectual property and the administration of these laws. 1 INDEX S.No Contents Pg Nos 1 Introduction 3 2 History of IPR in India 10 3 Overview of Laws related to Intellectual Property 16 Rights in India 4 Copyright 17 5 Patent 38 6 Trademark 66 7 Designs 76 8 Geographical Indications of Goods 84 9 Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Design 91 10 Biological Diversity 96 11 Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmer Rights 101 12 Undisclosed Information 106 13 Indian Intellectual Property – Administrative 107 Machinery 14 The Agreement of Trade Related Aspects of 111 Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) 15 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) 113 16 Intellectual Property Treaties 116 17 Commercialization of Intellectual Property 119 Rights(IPR) 18 Important Websites 122 2 1. -
A Comparison of Indian and Chinese Trademark
A Comparison of Indian and Chinese Trademark Law This is an important study conducted after discussing with more than 100 business associates in China, Hongkong, India & London. Many publications, Press News were collected to compile this report. The Indian legal system comes under frequent criticism for various reasons – systemic delays being among the top reasons, folloed by corruption in enforcement bodies and the lower judiciary. Delays particularly haunt those foreign entities that have not until recently had India on their map. An outstanding aspect of India’s legal system is that it affords the same protective rights to citizens and domestic legal entities as it does to foreign individuals or legal entities under its IP laws. Evolution of the legal system Indian courts have incorporated the principle of transborder reputation in trademark law jurisprudence and granted countless foreign trademark right owners wide protection for their brands, often in the absence of even a trademark registration in India, and frequently without use of the trademark in the Indian market. Indian courts have protected these trademarks on broad principles of equity and the desirabiulity of upholding good business ethics under the law of torts. There are adquate opportunities in India’s legal system to remedy an incorrect decision or wrongly laid down law. The writ jurisdiction of the courts under the constitution is a powerful tool for any person to seek an effective remedy against acts of arbitrariness, inaction and/or negligence on the part of government authorities, and this has come to the aid of many foreign entities with a grievance against the authorities established under IP laws. -
The Freedom to Copy: Copyright, Creation, and Context
The Freedom to Copy: Copyright, Creation, and Context Olufunmilayo B. Arewa* Although much separates them musically, George Harrison and Michael Bolton share a common legal fate. Both have been held liable in copyright infringement cases in which a court articulated theories of liability based on subconscious infringement. This Article discusses how decisions in the Bolton, Harrison, and other copyright infringement cases reflect a common failing. Such decisions highlight the incomplete nature of the theories of creativity and creation processes in copyright doctrine. After discussing current approaches to questions of creation, this Article suggests ways in which copyright theory can better incorporate a contextualized understanding of creativity and creation processes. Creativity in copyright is frequently characterized as not involving copying, which is typically thought to be antithetical to both originality and creativity. This stigmatization of copying, however, means that copyright theory cannot adequately account for the reality of not infrequent similarities between works that are a result of copying both ideas and expression in the creation of new works. This missing theoretical link has significant implications for copyright in practice. The lack of legal analysis of the full range of creativity and processes of creation is also a major reason why copyright theory often has such difficulty delineating what constitutes appropriate and inappropriate copying of existing works. * Associate Professor, Northwestern University School of Law. A.B. Harvard College; M.A. Anthropology, Ph.D. Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley; A.M. Applied Economics, University of Michigan; J.D., Harvard Law School. For their helpful comments and suggestions on earlier drafts, I am indebted to Margaret Chon, Julie Cohen, Paul Heald, Kevin Jon Heller, Andrew Koppelman, Roberta Rosenthal Kwall, Jacqueline Lipton, Andrew P. -
OVERVIEW of TRADEMARK LAWS in INDIA Index Slide Particulars Slide Particulars Nos
OVERVIEW OF TRADEMARK LAWS IN INDIA Index Slide Particulars Slide Particulars nos. nos. 3. India as an amenable jurisdiction 13-20. Recognition i. Registered trademarks under the Act ii. Well-known trademarks iii. Trade dress 4. Trademark as an international concept 21-26. Protection: i. Ownership ii. Opposition iii. Rectification / cancellation iv. Cross-bd/border/ trans-bdborder reputtitation 5-8. International Trademark law: 27-28. Actions– infringement and passing – off i. Paris Convention ii. TRIPS iii. Madrid Protocol 9. Indian Statutory Law: Trademarks Act, 1999 30-33. Civil and criminal remedies i. Civil – injunction, damages and accounts of profits, costs, delivery-up, other restraint orders, ii. Criminal – imprisonment and fine 10-12. Draft Trade Marks (Amendment) Rules, 2015 34. Conclusion and Na tiona l In te llec tua l Proper tty RiRight hts Po licy, 2016 India as an amenable jurisdiction India is widely recognized as an amenable jurisdiction for trademark registration and protection of trademark rights, inter alia : Constant modernization of trademark offices with a vision to protect IPR; leading to growth in trade, commerce and industry; Multi-tier enforcement mechanism – Registrar, intellectual property appellate board (IPAB), civil and criminal courts; At the Registrar level: Wide recognition of trademarks, trade-dress and well-known trademarks; Speedy registration process (constantly improving; for instance, the finance minister of India has proposed a policy which will allow registration of trademarks within a period -
Cloud Computing Bible Is a Wide-Ranging and Complete Reference
A thorough, down-to-earth look Barrie Sosinsky Cloud Computing Barrie Sosinsky is a veteran computer book writer at cloud computing specializing in network systems, databases, design, development, The chance to lower IT costs makes cloud computing a and testing. Among his 35 technical books have been Wiley’s Networking hot topic, and it’s getting hotter all the time. If you want Bible and many others on operating a terra firma take on everything you should know about systems, Web topics, storage, and the cloud, this book is it. Starting with a clear definition of application software. He has written nearly 500 articles for computer what cloud computing is, why it is, and its pros and cons, magazines and Web sites. Cloud Cloud Computing Bible is a wide-ranging and complete reference. You’ll get thoroughly up to speed on cloud platforms, infrastructure, services and applications, security, and much more. Computing • Learn what cloud computing is and what it is not • Assess the value of cloud computing, including licensing models, ROI, and more • Understand abstraction, partitioning, virtualization, capacity planning, and various programming solutions • See how to use Google®, Amazon®, and Microsoft® Web services effectively ® ™ • Explore cloud communication methods — IM, Twitter , Google Buzz , Explore the cloud with Facebook®, and others • Discover how cloud services are changing mobile phones — and vice versa this complete guide Understand all platforms and technologies www.wiley.com/compbooks Shelving Category: Use Google, Amazon, or -
Gauhati University Guwahati ‐ 781014
‐ GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GUWAHATI ‐ 781014 REGULATION AND SYLLABUS OF THREE YEAR LAW DEGREE COURSE IN SEMESTER SYSTEM WITH CHOICE BASED CREDIT AND GRADING SYSTEM LEADING TO THE AWARD OF LL.B. / LL.B.(HONS.) DEGREE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA RULES (UNDER THE ADVOCATES ACT, 1961) PART –IV and as approved and adopted by the Bar Council of India at its meeting held on 14th September, 2008 vide resolution No. 110/2008 (Rules under Section 7(h) & (i), 24(1)(c)(iii) and (iii)(a), 49(1)(af) ,(ag), and (d) of the Advocates Act, 1961. And as approved and passed by the Academic Council, Gauhati University on ………………………… 2 ‐ REGULATION ‐ PART – A TITLE, COMMENCEMENT AND DEFINITIONS 1. Title: This regulation may be known as the Regulation of 3yr. Law Degree Course in Semester System with Choice Based Credit and Grading System (CBCGS) leading to the Award of LL.B. / LL.B. (Hons.) Degree. 2. Commencement: a) This regulation shall come into force from 2010‐2011 session. b) The students who took admission in 3yr. law degree course in 2009‐10 session will also be governed by the syllabus & course structure prepared under this regulation from 2010‐11 session i.e. from their Semester – III onwards, with necessary minor adjustments as noted in relevant places of the syllabus and the course structure. In order to reduce the number of papers of the students who took admission in 2009‐10 session this arrangement has been made. However, the results of the students who took admission in 2009‐10 session will be declared in marks & not in grades. -
Banaras Law Journal 2014 Vol 43 No. 2
2014 1 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL 2 THE BANARAS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 43] Cite This Issue as Vol. 43 No. 2 Ban.L.J. (2014) The Banaras Law Journal is published bi-annually by the Faculty of Law, Banaras Hindu University since 1965.Articles and other contributions for possible publication are welcomed and these as well as books for review should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief, Banaras Law Journal, Faculty of Law, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi - 221005, India, or e-mailed to <[email protected]>. Views expressed in the Articles, Notes & Comments, Book Reviews and all other contributions published in this Journal are those of the respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board of Editors of the Banaras Law Journal. In spite of our best care and caution, errors and omissions may creep in, for which our patrons will please bear with us and any discrepancy noticed may kindly be brought to our knowlede which will improve our Journal. Further it is to be noted that the Journal is published with the understanding that Authors, Editors, Printers and Publishers are not responsible for any damages or loss accruing to any body. In exchange for Banaras Law Journal, the Law School, Banaras Hindu University would appreciate receiving Journals, Books and monographs, etc. which can be of interest to Indian specialists and readers. c Law School, B.H.U., Varanasi- 221005 Composed and Printed by Raj Kumar Jaiswal, Dee Gee Printers, Khojwan Bazar, Varanasi-221010, U.P., (India). 2014 EDITORIAL COMMITTEE 3 Prof. -
A Conceptual Framework for Copyright Philosophy and Ethics Jon M
Cornell Law Review Volume 88 Article 2 Issue 5 July 2003 Normative Copyright: A Conceptual Framework for Copyright Philosophy and Ethics Jon M. Garon Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Jon M. Garon, Normative Copyright: A Conceptual Framework for Copyright Philosophy and Ethics, 88 Cornell L. Rev. 1278 (2003) Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol88/iss5/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NORMATIVE COPYRIGHT: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR COPYRIGHT PHILOSOPHY AND ETHICS Jon M. Garont This Article explores the theoretical underpinnings of copyright to deter- mine which theories provide an appropriate basis for copyright. The Article first critiques the leading conceptual underpinnings, including naturallaw, copyright's intangible nature, economic balancing and copyright's role in creatingincentives for new authorship. The Article then addresses each of the three core elements in normative justice-the social contract, the legal rules, and the mechanisms of enforcement-to develop a schema for reestablishing a normatively valid copyright policy. The research presented demonstrates that the intangible nature of copy- right does not govern the public's attitude toward copyright. Instead, norms associated with plagiarism illustrate society's ability to accept intangible property rules, while comparison with shoplifting indicates a strong corollary to piracy involving physical goods. -
Developing Applications Using Platform-As-A-Service
Whitepaper Developing Applications using Platform-as-a-Service A Paradigm Shift in Application Development WOLF Frameworks Developing Applications using Platform-as-a-Service Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................................3 Traditional Application Development ........................................................................................................................3 Client/Server Architecture ..........................................................................................................................................5 Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) ..........................................................................................................................5 Web Application development ...................................................................................................................................6 Advantages of Web Based Applications .....................................................................................................................7 Why Platform-as-a-Service? .......................................................................................................................................8 Difference between traditional application development and PaaS application development ................................8 Platform-as-a-Service Benefits ...................................................................................................................................9 -
The Right "To Authorize" in Us Copyright Law: Questions of Contributory
87 Copyright (c) 1996 PTC Research Foundation of Franklin Pierce Law Center IDEA: The Journal of Law and Technology 1996 37 IDEA 87 THE RIGHT "TO AUTHORIZE" IN U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW: QUESTIONS OF CONTRIBUTORY INFRINGEMENT AND EXTRATERRITORIALITY PHANESH KONERU * * Third Year Student, J.D. Program, University of San Diego School of Law; Ph.D., University of Southern California, 1992; admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The author is grateful to Professors Paul Horton and Darrell Bratton of the University of San Diego Law School for their helpful discussions during preparation of this manuscript. Any errors, omissions or misstatements should be attributed to the author alone. This work is dedicated to the author's parents and wife. I. INTRODUCTION The U.S. Copyright Act of 1976 n1 (hereinafter "the Copyright Act") grants copyright owners exclusive rights "to do" and "to authorize" certain acts. n2 Since the addition of the phrase "to authorize" to the copyright statute in 1976, n3 courts have been divided over the scope of the authorization right. [*88] The question has been whether a violation of the authorization right results in direct n4 or third party infringement. n5 A direct infringer is always liable to the copyright owner, whereas a third party infringer is liable only if the authorized infringement actually takes place. n6 Substantial authority argues for the proposition that the right "to authorize" is no more than a mere codification of the common law doctrines of contributory infringement and vicarious liability, identified as the "codification theory." n7 Under this theory, for an authorizer n8 to be liable, [*89] conduct that amounts to authorization should be analyzed under third party liability theories which require that the authorized infringement has actually occurred. -
INTELLECTUAL PRIVILEGE: Copyright, Common Law, and The
INTELLECTUAL PRIVILEGE Copyright, Common Law, and the Common Good TOM W. BELL Arlington, Virginia Founders’ Copyright 2014 by Tom Bell. (See opposite for more information.) Second printing, April 2018 Printed in the United States of America Mercatus Center at George Mason University 3434 Washington Blvd., 4th Floor Arlington, VA 22201 www.mercatus.org 703-993-4930 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Bell, Tom W. Intellectual privilege : copyright, common law, and the common good / Tom W. Bell. pages cm ISBN 978-0-9892193-8-9 (pbk.) -- ISBN 978-0-9892193-9-6 (e-book (kindle)) 1. Copyright--United States. I. Title. KF2994.B45 2014 346.7304’82--dc23 2014005816 COPYRIGHT NOTE Not long ago, in “Five Reforms for Copyright” (chapter 7 of Copyright Unbalanced: From Incentive to Excess, published by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University in 2012), I suggested that the United States should return to the kind of copyright the Founders supported: the one they created in their 1790 Copyright Act. The Founders’ copyright had a term of only fourteen years with the option to renew for another fourteen. It conditioned copyright on the satisfaction of strict statutory formali- ties and covered only maps, charts, and books. The Founders’ copyright protected only against unauthorized reproductions and offered only com- paratively limited remedies. This book follows through on that policy advice. The Mercatus Center and I agreed to publish it under terms chosen to recreate the legal effect of the Founders’ 1790 Copyright Act. For example, the book’s copy- right will expire in 2042 (if not before), and you should feel free to make a movie or other derivative work at any time.