Search Indian IP Case Law
Judgments of the Supreme Court and the High Courts on patents, trade marks, copyright, designs and geographical indications — organised by Act and section, each with a link to the judgment on the court’s website.
7 results
for “Guidelines”
Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
The Direct Selling Guidelines, 2016, being advisory executive instructions without the force of law, cannot bind e-commerce platforms. Once goods bearing a registered trade mark have been put on the market with the proprietor's co…
E-commerceExhaustion Of RightsIntermediary LiabilityOnline InfringementPatentsFerid Allani v. Union of India & Ors.
Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970 excludes only computer programmes per se from patentability, and not inventions implemented through a computer programme which demonstrate a technical effect or technical contribution to the s…
Computer Related InventionsPatentable Subject MatterSection 3(k)Software PatentPatentsMicrosoft Technology Licensing, LLC v. The Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs
An invention is not excluded under Section 3(k) merely because it is implemented as an algorithm on a computer; the determinative question is whether the claimed subject matter demonstrates a technical effect or technical contribu…
Computer Related InventionsPatent ProsecutionSection 3(k)Software PatentCopyrightPreity G. Zinta v. Google LLC & Ors.
When someone uses AI to create deepfakes or morphed content that distorts or alters how a performer's actual performance looks or sounds, without her consent, this violates her moral rights under Section 38-B of the Copyright Act.…
AI DeepfakesIntermediary LiabilityMoral Rights of PerformersPersonality RightsPatentsRaytheon Company v. Controller General of Patents and Designs
Novel hardware is not a prerequisite for the patentability of a computer-related invention under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act; the applicable test is whether the claimed invention involves a technical advancement and provides a…
Computer Related InventionsPatent ProsecutionSection 3(k)Software PatentPatentsSulzer Mixpac AG v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs
Adjudication under the Patents Act has to be guided by the statute rather than by a mechanical, step-by-step application of judicial formulas. A patent decision cannot be overturned or deemed invalid solely because it did not stri…
Common Bar ElementInstallation BodyInventive StepObviousnessPatentsT-Mobile International AG and Co. KG. v. The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks and Anr.
Section 3(m) contains four disjunctive exceptions: a mere scheme, rule, or method of performing a mental act, and a method of playing a game. The word 'mere' qualifies the first three limbs, confining the exclusion to claims that …
Computer Implemented InventionGuidelinesMental ActMethod of Playing Game