Remove 2002 Remove IP Remove Patent Law
article thumbnail

IP as a political instrument in Russia

The IPKat

Kat friend Iana Kazeeva provides an enlightening discussion on steps taken by the Russian government and courts with respect to IP following the invasion of Ukraine. The common denominator is the use of changes to the IP law as a political instrument towards states taking “unfriendly” actions against Russia.

IP 133
article thumbnail

PATENTING MEDICAL PROCEDURES: A GLOBAL DILEMMA

Intepat

However, the patenting of methods for medical treatment of human beings presents a complex issue, intertwining patent law with medical law. Medical law, rooted in the Hippocratic Oath, prioritizes the preservation of human life.

Patent 52
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Parliamentary Standing Committee Report on IPR: Tipping the Scales of Patent Law? Part I

SpicyIP

In about 150 pages the Report suggests a major reevaluation of the IP framework in the country. Section 3(j) was introduced through the 2002 amendment to the Patents Act to meet India’s TRIPS obligation under Article 27 [Patentable Subject Matter]. b) imposes a restriction on patenting plants and animals.

Reporting 108
article thumbnail

Decoding The Scepticism Of Overlap Between Patents Law And Competition Law

IP and Legal Filings

The goal of competition law is to ensure fair functioning of the market. [1] 1] At a glance both the laws may seem to be conflicting but Intellectual property ensures fair amount of competition in the market which is also the goal of competition law. [2] 2] Hence it can be said that IP is pro-competition. 3] Divya S.,

article thumbnail

Supreme Court on Patent Law: November 2023

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch The Supreme Court is set to consider several significant patent law petitions addressing a range of issues from the application of obviousness standards, challenges to PTAB procedures, interpretation of joinder time limits IPR, to the proper scope patent eligibility doctrine. AT&T (No. Thomas , 547 U.S.

article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (November 25 – December 1)

SpicyIP

Here is our recap of last week’s top IP developments including summaries of the posts on IPO’s patent application rejection of HIV drug Dolutegravir, another judgement in the long-running Section 3(k) saga, this time on the patentability of business methods and the DHC IPD’s Annual Report 2023-24. Read more on this!

article thumbnail

Australia’s Reversal of its DABUS decision on AI-Generated Inventions: How Does this Impact an Imminent Canadian Discussion on AI Inventorship?

IPilogue

Thaler’s application for his AI, DABUS, to be the patent owner of an invention titled “ Food container and devices and methods for attracting enhanced attention ,” a product solely created by DABUS without any human interference. What Does This Mean in the Canadian Context? In Apotex Inc v Wellcome Foundation.,

Invention 110