NOPR Collection:

The Supreme Court Clarifies Indian Patent Invalidity Proceedings

2016-07-20T04:29:49Z

Title: The Supreme Court Clarifies Indian Patent Invalidity Proceedings Authors: Wilson, Neeti Abstract: The Indian intellectual property scenario is developing at a very fast rate in India and one finds some or the other newspaper headline related to the same. The current section is devoted to presenting current IP news in the limelight to keep the readers abreast with the changing trends. The spotlight for September 2014 is on the latest Supreme Court ruling in the area of patent procedure. Any comments or suggestions may be sent to neeti@anandandanand.com. Page(s): 358-360

The New European Commission and its Work Plan for EU Intellectual Property

2016-07-20T04:11:21Z

Title: The New European Commission and its Work Plan for EU Intellectual Property Authors: Cook, Trevor Abstract: The year 2014 sees major changes in the composition of two of the institutions that govern the European Union (EU); namely the European Parliament, elections for which were held earlier in the year, and the European Commission, whose members are nominated by Member States but must be approved by the Parliament, which takes office in November, and the new composition and structure of which was announced in September. The latter not only initiates EU legislation, and supervises the bodies that manage unitary EU intellectual property rights, most notably the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (shortly to be renamed the EU Trade Marks and Designs Agency) but is also responsible for enforcing the EU Treaties. This makes it timely to review the status of the Commission’s recent and pending initiatives in the field of intellectual property, not only in terms of specific legislative initiatives, many of which, in so far as they are already under way, have been the subject of previous articles in this series, but also in its ongoing program of review and of policy making, much of which is not immediately, or may never be, reflected in specific legislation. Page(s): 353-357

Impact of Awareness Programmes and Capacity Building in Farmers’ Plant Variety Registration under the PPV&FR Act

2016-07-20T04:11:17Z

Title: Impact of Awareness Programmes and Capacity Building in Farmers’ Plant Variety Registration under the PPV&FR Act Authors: Hanchinal, R R; Agrawal, R C; Prakash, Ravi; Stephen, Tammu; Jaiswal, Jyoti Abstract: Indian plant variety protection law is unique as it simultaneously aims to protect plant breeders as well as farmers. In the initial years of law implementation, the progress with respect to registration of farmers’ varieties was not only slow but also inconsistent, and the trend was erratic. The receipt of applications for Plant Genome Saviour Awards was also meagre due to non-awareness among the farming community in the agro-biodiversity rich regions. Planned awareness programmes in collaboration with National Agricultural Research System (NARS), non-government organizations (NGOs) and Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs, Farm Science Centres) throughout the country resulted in the receipt of more number of applications for farmers’ varieties registration and also for awards indicating that the training programmes, national dialogues on farmers rights, exhibitions and publications in local newspapers play an important role in confidence building and clearing misconceptions about filing for intellectual property rights. Organization of a large number of capacity building programmes to both trainers and farmers in the agro-biodiversity rich regions is a very good strategy to attract more farmers/farming communities to file applications both for registration of farmers’ varieties and the Genome Saviour Awards. Page(s): 347-352

Denying Patentability of Scientific Theories

2016-07-20T04:11:00Z

Title: Denying Patentability of Scientific Theories Authors: Zekos, Georgios I Abstract: In general, intellectual property systems do not protect ideas but only their practical applications. To grant protection, patent law imposes stringent checks like novelty, non-obviousness, and utility, while copyright law involves a lower threshold of originality. Patentability determinations have undergone considerable disarray over the last few decades. The question to be answered is whether pure science has become patentable as against scientific development even as legal reforms have tightened the standards for patentability narrowing it to reduce the scope of patent-eligible subject matter and to make patents harder to acquire (thus easier to invalidate) based on obviousness. Can simple advances in science and its methods be regarded as patentable or should there be significant progress for satisfying patentability criteria is a question that needs to be answered. Page(s): 337-346