Menu
The Legal Department at UJA is delighted to impart certain legal knowledge as construed under Legal Chronicle to keep the readers aware of the recent updates and developments that revolve around various aspects of the law. Our ultimate goal is to enable our readers to develop a sense of familiarity with the complexities of Indian as well as International Law.
With our proven expertise and knowledge, the Chronicle shall uncover the intricacies of various branches of law like International Law, Labour Law, Intellectual Property, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Business, and Corporate laws.
In this edition of Legal Chronicle, we have analyzed the important legal developments that extensively highlight distinct aspects of law and profoundly make arrangements to discuss the importance of Intellectual Property Laws.
We hope that this edition creates a sense of enthusiasm for our readers and successfully delivers the plethora of legal knowledge as intended. In case you have any feedback or need us to include any information to make this issue more informative, please feel free to write to us at legal@uja.in
The case of Starbucks Corporation V. Lol Café revolved around the trademark “Frappuccino’’ which was registered by the Plaintiff – ‘Starbucks Corporation’, a company in existence
under the laws of the State of Washington, the United States of
America. The Plaintiff, under its registered trademark “Frappuccino”offered a variety of cold beverages to its customers worldwide and the said trademark was being used by the Defendant at a café in Rajasthan after a beverage amed
‘Brownie Chips Frappuccino’. According to the Plaintiff, the said
usage of the subject trademark transpired without any authorization or license. The Plaintiff additionally claimed that such usage was not limited to the Itinerary of the Café, but was also used on promotional websites like Zomato which conse
quently led the Plaintiff to send multiple notices to the Defendants with the intention to stop such unauthorized usage.
The Plaintiff ultimately approached the Delhi High Court and prayed for damages; a rendition of accounts of illegally earned by the defendants alongwith an order of delivery and handing over of all the impugned goods, menu cards, and all other goods of any nature bearing and/or containing the impugned mark ‘FRAPPUCCINO’, to the plaintiff for their destruction.
The Court after hearing both sides, passed an order in favor of Plaintiff on the grounds that the use of the trademark ‘Frappuccino’ by the defendants was dishonest and was intended to deceive the consumer and that it not only amounted to infringement but also in passing off the goods and thus awarded damages of Rs. 2,00,000/- in favor of the Plaintiff.
In the reported case of N.N. Global Mercantile Private Limited v. Indo Unique Flame Limited and others, an issue as to whether the arbitration clause in a contract, which is required to be registered and stamped, but is not registered and stamped, is valid and enforceable arose before the Supreme Court of India.
The five-judge beach in its majority concluded that the court is bound to examine the instrument, in this case – the Arbitration Agreement and, if such instrument is found unstamped or insufficiently stamped, the instrument is to be impounded at the said section 11 (Arbitration and Conciliation Act) stage. Howev er, the minority was of the opinion that when an instrument is found inefficiently stamped or un-stamped at the pre-referral stage, is an enforceable document for the appointment of the arbitrator and that it cannot be a threshold at such a preliminary stage.
The Court upheld the majority view and referred to the following part of the Judgment in SMS Tea Estates (supra):
“Having regard to Section 35 of the Stamp Act, unless the stamp duty and penalty due in respect of the instrument is paid, the court cannot act upon the instrument, which means that it cannot act upon the arbitration agreement also which is part of the instrument…”
The Respondent (Radhika Theatres) was running a cinema theatre since 1981. It had paid its ESI contributions up to the month of September, 1989. Subsequently, it only had less than 20 employees, and it did not pay its ESI contributions.
The Appellant (ESI Corporation) herein issued demand notices to the Respondent, the Respondent challenged the validity of demand notices before the EI court arguing that prior to the insertion of subsection (6) of the Section 1 of the ESI Act w.e.f 20.09.1989 it had less than 20 persons and therefore the ESI act was not applicable to it. The case was dismissed by the EI court vide an order dated 13.12.2010. Later, in an appeal before the High Court, it was observed that Section 1(6) of the ESI Act shall not be applied retrospectively. Aggrieved by the order of the Telangana High Court the ESI Corporation filed an appeal before the hon’ble Supreme Court.
Whether the Section 1(6) of the ESI Act has a retrospective effect?
The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the intent, purpose, and preamble of the ESI Act shall be taken into consideration while deciding its applicability. Since the Act was implemented to benefit workers, it is necessary that the ESI Act should receive a liberal and beneficial construction to facilitate its purpose.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court overruled the Judgment of the High Court and held that Section 1(6) of the ESI Act is retrospective in nature, and Section 1(6) of ESI Act applies to all establishments, regardless of when they were established or the number of people employed by the establishment.
The Supreme Court further set aside the Judgement and order of the High Court and restored the Demand notice for the period post-20.10.1989.
A GUI or Graphic User Interface is a form of user interface that allows users to interact with electronic devices. A Design Application no.298921 was by UST Global (Singapore) Pte Ltd in 2017 for registration of a design titled “touch screen” for novel surface ornamentation which is a GUI. The Application was refused on the ground that GUI is incapable of design registration. It was also held that a GUI is only visible when it is in ON mode and there can be no design when the product is in OFF mode. It was also observed that the GUI does not follow
the process of any paricular in dustrial manufacturing but is mainly created by software development pro cessing. The Appellant pleaded that order was erroneous, and shall be set
aside as GUI is software, an article of value, and the subject design has never been in the public domain and shall be capable of obtaining a registration. A well-implemented GUI
will influence customers to buy such products.
Whether the said design application can be considered as a design under the Designs Act, 2000.
The Hon’ble Court observed that the Design submitted by the Appellant is a 2D design. The novelty of the same can be judged by the eye and there is no requirement to touch the device in respect of the design. It further has held that the application of GUI is via embedding source code in microprocessors and displayed on the screen by illuminating pixels by electronic means. Thus, it can be regarded as an Industrial process under Section 2(d) of the Designs Act, 2000. The Hon’ble High Court on the basis of the above-mentioned reasoning set aside the order of the Controller of Patents and Designs and has remanded back the matter to the Controller for a fresh Ponsideration..
HOD - Corporate & Commercial Law
In today’s society, the most important pillars are innovation and creativity, and intellectual property rights are the main economic assets/property for all businesses, particularly aiding in
the advancement of intellectual property. It takes even more importance for technology start-ups, as fresh developments are produced on a daily basis.
Intellectual property has considerable brand value in almost all businesses, particularly manufacturing and technology. As a result, in order to retain their IP assets for future expansion, start-ups and SMEs must enhance their IP strategy early in their development.
Businesses should be cautious when valuing and enforcing their new discoveries and intellectual property. A well-defined IP purpose can assist a company in meeting its objectives
and establishing itself as a market leader.
With rising business revenue, the IP strategy should maintain the assets’ distinctive traits and cherish innovations in order to analyze/assess new geographies. Similarly, licencing or joint ventures to build innovative solutions that suit the markets unmet needs could accomplish and conclude the same.
In today’s society, the most important pillars are innovation and creativity, and intellectual property rights are the main economic assets/property for all businesses, particularly aiding in
the advancement of intellectual property. It takes even more importance for technology start-ups, as fresh developments are produced on a daily basis.
Intellectual property has considerable brand value in almost all businesses, particularly manufacturing and technology. As a result, in order to retain their IP assets for future expansion, start-ups and SMEs must enhance their IP strategy early in their development.
Businesses should be cautious when valuing and enforcing their new discoveries and intellectual property. A well-defined IP purpose can assist a company in meeting its objectives
and establishing itself as a market leader.
With rising business revenue, the IP strategy should maintain the assets’ distinctive traits and cherish innovations in order to analyze/assess new geographies. Similarly, licencing or joint ventures to build innovative solutions that suit the markets unmet needs could accomplish and conclude the same.
In reality, intellectual property (IP) assets are more valuable than physical assets in any business. This is especially important for organisations that operate in knowledge-intensive and highly imaginative industries, or for businesses with a well-know brand name. As a result, failing to register your IP, innovations, patents, trade marks, or any other IP owned by a corporation while developing, it may have serious legal and commercial consequences when you are ready to release it to the market.
Strong market position and competitive advantage: Intellectual property also offers businesses the exclusive right to prevent others from commercially employing a product or service, decreasing competition for their innovative product and allowing the organisation to create a dominant market position
If a company has invested considerable time and money in R&D operations, utilising the IP system’s capabilities is the greatest method to recover your R&D investments and make higher returns on your investments..
Having IP assets that are of interest to others may be advantageous when requesting permission to use others’ IP assets. In such cases, businesses routinely arrange cross-licensing
agreements.
Locally: The first step is to be the first person to register your intellectual property (IP) in the relevant 10+1 market.
Globally: Businesses must eventually register their intellectual property (IP) in the country/ies where they are now doing business or want to do business in the future. It is also a good idea to register your intellectual property in countries where there is a booming counterfeit market.
IP can be further safeguarded by adopting methods such as establishing NDAs and other similar agreements with investors, vendors, personnel, and so on.
Because the majority of organisations rely on technology, such as effective firewalls, it is vital for them to acquire the technological knowledge to strengthen their Pybersecurity.
To resort to enforcing rights against someone who has misappropriated or divulged trade secrets presupposes that reasonable precautions have been taken. This, in our opinion, is not totally justified. Regardless of the owner’s best measures, there is always the risk of exploitation or exposure by a motivated or malicious infringement!
Your value in a technical company is decided by the technology you develop. A full-time IP manager should be assigned to track all employee activities, backup all systems on a daily basis, and ensure that no former employees are violating their contracts. Companies should consult with intellectual property specialists and create a comprehensive plan. If a corporation loses its intellectual property while utilising sufficient safe-guards, it is prudent to pursue legal action..
IP laws provide penalties/sanctions for unauthorised use of protected intellectual property assets. However, they enable businesses to claim ownership of and derive value from their sophisticated and unique returns. The fact that protecting intellectual property is an unbiased issue shared by a broad coalition of stakeholders ties all of these significant and diverse topics together. These rights are endorsed and implemented by all industries, including small, medium, and large businesses.
We recognise the importance of protecting intellectual property rights both at home and abroad. There is a widespread misconception that protecting intellectual property (IP) is the exclusive domain of larger corporations and is incompatible with smaller and medium-sized organisations (SMEs). While huge corporations engage in intellectual property
for excellent reasons, such as protecting their products and services, preventing competition, and creating new revenue streams for themselves, IP also benefits and strengthens smaller firms.
This document is intended to provide general information and is not intended to be substituted for any legal or professional advice. This document is meant exclusively for informational purposes and not for advertising or solicitation. UJA has made significant efforts to ensure that the information contained in this document is accurate and reliable. However, the information herein is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind. UJA hereby disclaims all responsibility and liability, whether stated or implied, for the accuracy, validity, adequacy, reliability, or completeness of any information provided under this document. In no event shall UJA be held liable for any losses or damages whatsoever incurred as a result of using this document.
