“Is new hardware required for patenting computer implemented inventions in India?” – this is the question posed by the author in the ‘Article’ section of IPR Amicus – June, 2014. Discussing an order of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), the author concludes that the law does not mandate the requirement of a novel hardware or a special modification of an existing hardware for patentability.
There is no presumption of validity attached to a patent and hence challenge to it in an infringement proceeding cannot be set aside by taking presumptive approach according to Delhi High Court. This issue discusses this order which also lays down steps to be considered by the court in answering the question of obviousness. This issue also discusses under ‘Ratio decidendi’ column order of Madras High Court dealing with the question whether a co-patentee can file suit for infringement even if the other patentee is not a co-plaintiff. When there is no direct infringement, a person cannot be liable for inducing infringement, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled and readers can enjoy reading summary of this order in this issue of IPR Amicus.
Two different judgments – one by CJEU and another by Court of Appeal for Second Circuit (US) on the issue of exception from copyright to institutions when books are digitized and made available to public, from part of news story under ‘News Nuggets’ section. News on the call by the United States to end the moratorium on complaints based on the non-violate clause in the TRIPS agreement is also reported in this section.
