Remove 2007 Remove Copying Remove Registration
article thumbnail

Bombay High Court Rules that Copyright Registration of a Label is not Compulsory

Kashishipr

In May 2007, the label mark ‘SOYA DROP’ was registered. NTC even referred to the Bombay High Court’s judgment in Dhiraj Dharamdas Dewani vs. Sonal Info Systems Pvt Ltd, where it held that Copyright Registration is compulsory to maintain a civil or criminal action under the Copyright Act of 1957.

article thumbnail

Precedential No. 18: TTAB Orders Cancellation of Two Registrations Under Section 14(3) Due to Registrant's Misrepresentation of Source

The TTABlog

Belmora ) had the TTAB tackled this issue, and here it reached the same outcome: cancellation of two registrations on the ground that Registrant Meenaxi used its registered marks THUMS UP and LIMCA to misrepresent the source of its soft drink products. Otto Kern GmbH , 83 USPQ2d 1861, 1863 (TTAB 2007). Meenaxi Enterprise, Inc.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Customs Intervention for IP in the Indian Sub-Continent

Kashishipr

The Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 and The Customs Act, 1962 form the legal basis for Customs Recordal of IPRs in India. A Unique Temporary Registration Number (UTRN) is generated on filing the online application. Images of genuine goods (for trademarks and designs). Demand draft of Rs.

IP 105
article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (September 4- September 10)

SpicyIP

AI and Copyright: More Developments – Human Prompts are Not ‘Direct Instructions’ After the Thaler case, the US Copyright Office passed another interesting order on AI-generated works, this time refusing the registration due to the work’s failure to meet the de-minimis threshold. Dr. Reddy’s Labs Ltd. Promoshirt SM SA v.

article thumbnail

Landmark Trademark Battles: Shaping Brand Protection Globally and in India

IP and Legal Filings

Apple had accused Samsung of copying the features of the iPhone, like the rounded-rectangle shape, home button, and the grid icon layout. Whirlpool was able to claim rights over its trademark in this country, even though it didn’t have a physical presence here and did not have any registration at that time. Dongre and Ors.

Brands 91
article thumbnail

The Supreme Court’s Unsettling Attempt at Settling the Debate on Section 63 of the Copyright Act

SpicyIP

Abdul Sathar v Nodal Officer, Anti-Piracy Cell, Kerala Crime Branch Office & Anr, 2007. Sureshkumar S/o Kumaran v the Sub Inspector of Police, 2007. Moreover, Section 64 of the Copyright Act shows that on an action of seizure, the police officer can “seize copies of infringing works without a warrant.” Andhra Pradesh.

Copyright 137
article thumbnail

IPR infringement in yellow-and-blue logo: Lidl wins High Court dispute against Tesco

The IPKat

Therefore, the Court considered that Tesco had copied a substantial part of Lidl’s mark with text, and thus also infringed Lidl’s copyright in the logo. Tesco also claimed that Lidl had applied to register the latter as a trade mark in bad faith.