Contents

• Indian Government Proposes Law to Protect Trade Secrets
• Getting Unconventional: Charting a Future with Non-Traditional Trademarks
• Indian Geographical Indications at Stake
• India’s First Compulsory License Request: The NATCO Nimble
• Data Exclusivity: Issues and Concerns
• Bundling the Bolar Provision
• Utility Model Patents can Accelerate Innovation

Editorial

The Novartis-Glivec case and the ongoing litigation between Roche and Cipla occupied the centre stage of the Indian IP discourse over the past few months. The Courts have rendered well-thought out decisions creating jurisprudential foundation for issues relating to designs, the interface between trade marks and domain names, the jurisprudence on awarding damages for IP infringement, apart from Roche v. Cipla.

Discussions on issues such as the draft manual for patent examination, IPO becoming an ISA/ IPEA, augmenting the quality of patent examination, a new law for utility models, an IP Institute to train judges and patent examiners, accession to the Madrid protocol, a specialized Patent/ IP court and so on, are also doing the rounds. An IP auction conducted in Bangalore has also been viewed as a step forward in commercializing IP. Transforming IP assets into tradable commodities will transform the nature of Intellectual Property Rights from ‘trade related’ to ‘tradable’. As always, arguments supporting either side may be rendered.

Patent examiners carrying out independent prior art searches and examining applications more closely relying on International Search Report (ISR) or International Preliminary Report on Patentability (IPER) is a welcome change. Their participation in training and exchange programmes also reflects in their application of expertise. With a major variation in the standards of patent examination, the challenge lies in bringing consistency amongst examiners in the same technical area and consequently amongst all the four patent offices. Appropriate training and a well written Manual of Patent Practice and Procedure will enable the IPO to overcome such inconsistencies. As regards the functioning of other IP bodies, the Designs Act needs to be amended to render IPAB the jurisdiction to hear appeals from the Controller, thus bringing all IP regimes on the same foothold

As evident, the Indian IP system is being refurbished in continuum. This issue of Lex Orbis Newsletter addresses some of these emerging issues, providing our readers an insight into the prevailing concerns in the sphere of IP practice. Through this issue, we move forth in our endeavor to be a part of the larger process of bringing about progress in the Indian IP system.