IPR (intellectual property rights) is generally an ideal way or right which is given to every individual inventor who has invented something where he deserves to hold the sole ownership of the idea, or object.
Intellectual Property Rights is divided into 4 categories Patent, trademark, copyright and Trade Secret.
In a patent, the sole right is with the owner to exclude or include others from making, using or selling the invention. The question which generally comes into mind is how to patent users earn money or if we have seen other companies use the patent technology for themselves, the answer is royalty. The patent owner licences the product to the people who can bring the product to market and can get monetary value out of the patented technology.
Coca-Cola registered itself for a patent in 1893. Now to file for a patent the owner needs to disclose the secrets to the public for 20 years. So, instead what Coca-Cola did was registered their recipe as Coca-Cola a trade secret. The various benefits of a Trade secret rather than a patent are unlimited protection, and immediate effect without any cost though it is expensive to maintain for a longer period. To make r register for a trade secret there should be certain elements such as secret, commercial value and Reasonable efforts by the rightful holder to keep its secrecy.
A trademark on the other hand is a form of intellectual property rights where it has its unique symbol or words which distinguish the product from other products and gives brand value to the product. When we look into the symbol of McDonald’s, logos of Adidas, puma, Nike, Apple etc. they all are distinguished from their competitors by their logos which they have made years to build the brand value and put a logo to it. There are 100 other companies which are involved in making burgers, mobile, shoes etc., But the brands spend millions on designing their logo and registering it under trademark. There are companies like Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft with the highest trademark value.
Copyright – The only precise way to understand copyright is that it is a right to copy. Unlike patent, trademark or trade secret it is not based on an object which has monetary value but rather on art which has monetary value, such as websites, computer software, musical lyrics, art, literature, poetry, graphic designs, musical compositions, novels, original architectural design, films, etc. The creator may voluntarily register for copyright if the creator wants to be secured end and have an upper hand in the legal system. If an owner does this he can anytime sue the person copying his work, there can be sure inspiration but no copying. According to Indian law, the person who has created the thing using his intellectual capacity is the real owner of the art and also has rights over it.
In case the work is done under a contract for other people the other person becomes the owner of the object or idea. For example, ‘A’ under a contract of music sang a song for ‘B’, here though the owner and the inventor of the art (music) are ‘A’, ‘B’ will be the actual owner of the music. One of the great examples can be seen in Bollywood where many singers such as Arijit Singh, Atif Aslam etc., sang songs for T-Series and now T-Series can put copyright to anyone using their music. There are instances where an artist uses other artist work for inspiration but the catch here is the inspiration should have elements of his skill, labour, judgement and effort. Copyright does not protect the ideas but the work, for a better understanding of a person writing a research paper on Laws related to Data protection and the idea of Data protection can be used by as many researchers as possible provided that the other researchers use thereof critical analysis and different understanding.
There is an exclusively latest patent filed by the Indian Army for their new exclusive digital camouflaged uniform, any unauthorised sale of uniforms or uniform fabric after the patent, design, and intellectual property rights have been granted is a crime, and the laws of the Patents Act of 1970 and the Designs Act of 2000 will apply.
The penalty is discussed under Sec 1081 says that in any lawsuit for infringement, the court may grant an injunction subject to such conditions as it sees fit, in addition to damages or an account of profits. It is also possible to issue a directive ordering the delivery or destruction of the infringer’s property. Depending on the specifics of the case, the court may also order the seizure, forfeiture, or destruction of the infringing goods as well as the materials that were used to make them.
Section 222 it is forbidden to import any material that closely resembles a registered design and to engage in any fraudulent or evident imitation of a registered design without the owner’s permission. According to the clause, damages for the violation of a single registered design in a civil case cannot exceed Rs. 50,000.
1 Section 108 of the Indian Patents Act
2 Designs Act, 2000
Landmark Cases Related to Intellectual Property Rights
PATENT – Bajaj Auto Ltd. vs. TVS Motors Comp. Ltd. (2010) Madras HC
Both the companies Bajaj and TVS have a huge market in India for automobiles but they had a dispute. This lawsuit is associated with a dispute that arose around the unlicensed use of DTS-I technology. Bajaj Auto, the plaintiff in this Lawsuit, requested a permanent injunction to prevent TVS Motors, the defendant, from utilising its patented technology in any way, and also seeking monetary compensation from them. The defendant’s use of twin spark plug technology inside the internal combustion engine was at the centre of this dispute.
Here the doctrine of Pith and marrow was applied3. The doctrine is applicable when a product or process violates a patent even though there is no obvious literal infringement apparent. This happens when the infringing product or process has a structure or performs a function that is strikingly similar and analogous to an element already claimed in the patented invention and thus accomplishes the same tasks and achieves the same results. A purposeful construction was used to determine if the “novel feature” represents “pith and marrow” or not, or if it is, as the plaintiff claims in their patent, an essential component of the invention.
TRADE SECRET – KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN
Colonel Sanders originally kept the formula’s secret components in his brain. He eventually recorded the recipe, and the handwritten version is now kept in a safe in Kentucky. The recipe is only known by a restricted group of employees who have signed a confidentiality agreement. Two different businesses combine a portion of the herb and spice mixture for increased protection. Before it is sent to the restaurants, it is automatically treated to standardise the blending. There are whispers that the top-secret recipe has additional prerequisites. One claims that the recipe is temporarily relocated to a secure place in an armoured car accompanied by a high-security motorcade when KFC improves its security systems. Here all elements such
3 The doctrine of pith and marrow is the doctrine that has been applied in English patent law for over a century to see whether there was an infringement of a patent where the product or process or device or apparatus alleged to constitute an infringement did not exactly or precisely fall within the text of the relevant claim within the specification of a patented invention secret, commercial value and enough efforts by the rightful holder to keep its secrecy can be clearly identified.
TRADEMARK- ISKON v. Iskon Apparel Pvt. Ltd. (2020) Bombay HC
ISKON, the plaintiff, filed the lawsuit alleging that the defendant had infringed on its trademark by using the phrase “ISKON” on its commodities and by passing off his brand. Additionally, the plaintiff has fought to have their trademark recognised as a well-known brand. It was determined that the defendant did blatantly disregard the plaintiff’s trademark and had misrepresented his brand by misleading consumers into thinking that its items were connected to the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s trademark, according to the court, has met all requirements to qualify as a well-known mark and hence the judgement was passed in the favour of the plaintiff.
COPYRIGHT – Star India Pvt. Ltd. v. Moviestrunk.com &Ors. (2020) Delhi HC
In this case, the defendant operated internet streaming platforms, whereas the plaintiff Star India produced and distributed movies. The unauthorized streaming of the plaintiff’s movie on the defendant’s streaming platform is the subject of the case. For copyright violation, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit. The defendant was found guilty of violating the copyright of the plaintiff’s work by streaming its copyrighted information without the plaintiff’s knowledge or authorization, according to the Delhi High Court. The exclusive right to exploitation of the Plaintiff was once again guaranteed when the Court awarded an injunction and damages.