Blawging our way to the front pages of Business Standard

SpicyIP is happy to announce to its readers that we’re ending the year on a happy note. The Business Standard one of India’s leading newspapers carried a front page report on how bloggers, like the SpicyIP Team, are driving India’s IPR agenda! The leading blogs mentioned in the report were SpicyIP, Feroze Ali’s pharmapatents.blogspot.com, Sandeep Rathod’s genericpharmaceuticals.blogspot.com & Varun Chhonker’s patentcircle.blogspot.com. The report goes on to say that the blogs are being recognized for “separating the wheat from the chaff in the flood of intellectual property related information.” As our readers must already know SpicyIP was started off by Shamnad as something to pass time but over the last years it has matured into a blog where “WE AIM TO INCREASE TRANSPARENCY IN INDIAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY/INSTITUTIONS. WE ALSO STAND FOR FAIR, OBJECTIVE AND ACCURATE REPORTING/REVIEW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND INNOVATION POLICY NEWS FROM INDIA.”

We would like to thank all our readers for their participation, encouragement and criticism. We only wish that there is much more participation in the blog from the readers. Please feel free to leave comments and stoke a debate on any of the topics that we write.

The Business Standard Report is as follows: (The only part of the report that caught me by complete surprise was that it seems to have merged Aysha’s location with my identity as a student!)

Bloggers Drive India’s IPR Regime

Joe C. Matthews,

New Delhi, 30^th November.

Early this year, Shamnad Basheer, a young intellectual property consultant, pointed out on his blog that a crucial paragraph in the report on patents by the RA Mashelkar panel was an exact copy of someone else’s research. This is what prompted the former director-general of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research to withdraw the report in February. Three months later, Basheer was at it again. As the government went into a tizzy over reports that some yoga postures had been patented in the US, he cleared the air by writing on his spicyipindia.blogspot.com that actually they were just some yoga accessories. These are just two instances of how bloggers are contributing to India’s transition to the new patent regime in which product patents are recognised as opposed to only process patents earlier. Basheer, Sandeep Rathod, Firoz Ali and Varun Chhonker are among those whose blogs are being recognised for separating the wheat from the chaff in the flood of intellectual property (IP)-related information. “In India IP is a recent trend. There isn’t enough affordable and readily available information,” Gopakumar Nair, a Mumbai-based patent expert, pointed out. Basheer began with sporadic posts. “It began as a time-pass in 2005. However, I found that there is a lot of interest in this area and this year I roped in three others as regular contributors to the blog,” said Basheer. Of the three, one is a legal consultant in New York, another a former journalist based in Paris and the third an Australian who focuses on global IP strategies. Basheer, who has also taken a law student from Chennai on board, claimed that his blog is a one-stop shop for IP information. Rathod, an IP professional attached to a global generic pharmaceutical company, draws hundreds of readers from across the IP space to his genericpharmaceuticals.blogspot.com. According to him, his posts, which are about international developments and their relevance to India, are attracting the attention of policy-makers, brokerage firms, IP professionals and patent attorneys. “The patent controller does not have to make public the decisions of the patents office. This is where I found my blog to be useful. Most of my entries are about pharmaceutical-specific patent information in the US, Europe and India,” Rathod said. He also distances himself from his employer. “I am not bothered about the effects on any particular sector.” For Chennai-based patent attorney Ali, pharmapatents.blogspot.com is a platform to explain the nuances of patent laws to the common man. “I give analyses of critical issues as and when they pop up.” The author of a book on Indian patent laws uses the blog to keep its readers updated on the changes in Indian IP laws. At least 500 readers flock everyday to patentcircle.blogspot.com to read the musings of Chhonker, a young IP consultant who specialises in IP litigation. “I began blogging after I found that blogs in the US play a crucial role in understanding patent laws. Patent attorneys there discuss cases threadbare on the blogs and are even read by judges,” he said.

SpicyIP Jobs

1. In house Attorney at Avaya India Private Limited.

Company Profile

Avaya India, a spin of AT&T Bell Labs and Lucent, is a leading global provider of business communications software and systems. Avaya designs, builds and manages
communications networks for more than one million businesses worldwide, including
more than 90 percent of the Fortune 500 Companies.

Job Description

The ideal candidate is expected to have a minimum of three to eight years of experience
practicing law in India, with a strong emphasis on intellectual property matters preferably with a software background or industry related experience.

Responsibilities

Supporting the company intellectual property strategy; Experience in open source software; Maintaining internal systems for procuring patents trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets; screening inventions; establishing procedures concerning; employee agreements; developing systems for licensing company technology; drafting and negotiating commercial contracts and technology licensing agreements.

2. Plesser Fellowship from the Centre for Democracy and Technology

The law firm of DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary has established a public
interest fellowship at the Center for Democracy & Technology ("CDT") in
honor of Ron Plesser, a senior partner at the firm who died suddenly in the
fall of 2004.

CDT works to promote democratic values and constitutional liberties in the
digital age. With expertise in law, technology, and policy, CDT engages in a
variety of strategies to enhance free expression and privacy, including
advocacy, public education and research. CDT works on legislation,
participates, participates in agency rulemakings, engages in litigation, and
fosters consensus building among public interest and private sector
stakeholders.

The Plesser Fellow will work on projects offering an opportunity to exercise leadership, and will participate in the organization's legal and public policy activities, in
order to provide the fellow with a strong foundation upon which to pursue a
public interest legal career in the privacy, civil liberties and Internet
policy field. For more information, go to www.ronplesserfellowship.org.

3. Hot Legal Jobs in China

Hudson, a leading recruiter of legal positions has requirements for the following openings:

(a) IP lawyer for a top tier UK & US firm

Job Description and Candidate Profile:

Has extensive experience in PRC intellectual property laws and procedure

Has gained such experience at a leading local or international firm in China and will have experience in both contentious and non-contentious matters. Candidates who have experience in patents will be much preferred and experience of litigating (or supervising litigation of) patents in China will be advantageous.

Has a broad base of China experience gained from FDI and general China work, and be able and willing to work on and general corporate/commercial and FDI matters as and when required as well as technology transfer and licenses.

An excellent academic background is a pre-requisite and a scientific background would be preferable

• Based in Shanghai or Beijing

• Excellent written & spoken English and Chinese

• 2+ years PQE with leading international or local firm

• Attractive remuneration package offered

(b) IP counsel for a leading Fortune 500 group

Job Description and Candidate Profile

Provide counsel and services on intellectual property (IP) matters to the company in China and work with colleagues at other locations on matters and projects to secure and protect IP rights and derive value from same for the company; to provide counsel as to the scope of inventions to be patented, including technical review of scope and designing and preparing description of examples; to evaluate competitive patent activity and provide counsel on right to practice or infringement issues and etc

B.S. degree in chemistry, chemical engineering or a related technical field, preference given to candidates with Patent Agent Qualification Certificate in PRC, at least 2+ years experience in patent case drafting and prosecution, freedom to practice opinions and client counseling Based in Shanghai , Putonghua (Mandarin) speaker is a must

Attractive remuneration package offered

Interested Candidates may contact Lillian Tang , at

lillian.tang@hudson.com

Copyrights, Music Licenses and New Year Parties

In yet another bid to establish the undeniable importance of IP law in your daily life, SpicyIP, is going to demonstrate how the Law of Copyright is going to impact all you party animals this December 31^st.

The Hindu recently reported that the Phonographic Performance Ltd.(PPL), a registered copyright society under the Copyright Act, is demanding that all commercial establishments start paying up for the music that they will be playing at year-end parties failing which action will be taken against them for copyright infringement. The report quoted PPL as saying “Musical nights and customised New Year packages are some of the most prolific means of revenue for pubs and hotels. A New Year’s Eve bash cannot be imagined without music, yet when it comes to paying for the commercial use of music, profit makers choose to evade the licence fee.”

Before going any further let us first de-mystify the exact objective and legal standing of PPL. The PPL is a Copyright Society under the Copyright Act. They represent the rights and interests of over 137 recording companies including biggies such as HMV (Sa Re Ga Ma India), Tips, Universal, Venus, Sony Music. As a Copyright Society PPL’s main function is to enforce the copyrights of their members especially rights such as Broadcasting, Telecasting, Webcasting and Public Performance. The rationale for having copyright societies is that it is impossible for interested parties to personally contact each and every copyright owner and negotiate a license to publicly perform their music. Therefore the Copyright Society rectifies this market failure of lack of complete information by representing all interests collectively. Anyone wanting to publicly perform any of the music, the copyright of which is owned by the members of the PPL, then in that case they have to first approach the PPL which will negotiate the license fees depending on the size and nature of the establishment. If licenses aren’t bought first the copyright society initiates legal action against the violator. Penalties for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act are imprisonment and heavy fines. The royalties are then disbursed to the respective copyright owners. The ultimate aim is thus to ensure that musicians are compensated for the use of their creativity by others. (For a Jamaican take on Copyright Societies, please, please, please click on this link and do turn up the volume!)

As far as I know copyright societies in India have never aggressively enforced the rights of their members. The American Copyright Societies such as the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) and the B.M.I. on the other hand are notorious for their ruthless enforcement of copyrights of their members. Labelled as the ‘music mafia’ & ‘court protected thieves’ by many in the West these Societies have been the target of dedicated hate sites (viewer discretion recommended!) exposing their alleged extortionist tactics. Admittedly some of the stories of ASCAP & BMI are chilling and shocking to say the least especially the enforcement actions against small businesses.

The overall objective of the enforcement by Copyright Societies, however remain fair and noble. Revenues for establishments such as pubs and discotheques depend solely on the genre of the music that is played by them. For example if a Delhi discotheque isn’t playing Bangra-Pop they might itself file for bankruptcy. The reason that Pecos or Mojos are such famous pubs in Bangalore is because of the music they play. Considering that most of the discotheques charge a few thousands per person for end year bashes it is only fair that they share the revenue with the copyright owners. The Hindu report quoted music license rates of Rs. 40,000. I’m sure that figure is going to vary over establishments and the matter will most definitely end up with the Copyright Board.

What remains to be seen is whether or not PPL intends to enforce these rights on a daily basis or whether its going to do so only for big events.

Petition to Increase Transparency at the Indian Patent Office

We wish to sincerely thank our readers and many others who supported us in our drive to increase transparency at the Indian Patent Office. Letters to the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh (and other Ministers and public functionaries involved with IP) were sent two weeks back, along with all your signatures.

We were pleasantly surprised at receiving support/signatures from unexpected quarters--folks that were interacting regularly with the patent office and ran the risk of attracting their ire. We salute their outstanding courage and wish to reiterate our commitment towards making the Indian patent office (and all other IP institutions in India) more transparent and accountable. Your courage inspires us to do much more in this regard and we thank you again for your overwhelming support.

The Mint and IPWatch covered our petition in excellent articles. These are reproduced below.

THE MINT ARTICLE:

Most of our readers may be familiar with CH Unnikrishnan, the lead pharma writer for the"Mint", a business daily that is setting new standards for journalism in India.

India's leading journalist on IP issues, Unni has been relentlessly pushing for more transparency at the Indian patent office. His recent article on a patent opposition filed by Lawyers Collective caused a stir at the Indian Patent Office. Hoffman La Roche's patent for Valganciclovir, a drug used to treat infections relating to HIV/AIDS, was opposed by Lawyers Collective and CIPLA, who requested a hearing in the matter.

The Controller in the Chennai office in charge of this matter did not grant a hearing--worse still, he never even bothered to respond to their plea for hearing. Rather, he went ahead and granted the patent. Unni's article in Mint brought this serious lapse to public notice and the Controller General in Delhi immediately ordered an enquiry. For an insightful analysis of the merits of this patent opposition and the interpretation problems with priority dates and the TRIPS mandate under Art 70.8, see this IMAK article.

On the SpicyIP petition to increase transparency by creating a robust patent database, Unni writes as below:

PM URGED TO MAKE PATENT PROCESS BETTER "On the heels of serious criticism against red tape and lack of transparency in India’s patent offices, a group of industry representatives, patent experts, lawyers and patient groups, have written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh urging his intervention in creating a system that will make information related to patents, their filings and grants public.

The letter, signed by about 150 people, has requested the Prime Minister to increase transparency and accountability at the Indian patent offices by creating an online database containing complete information on patent applications and grants, copies of patent office decisions, and patent examination details.

Right to Information: The letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh asks for an online database with information on patent applications and grants, copies of decisions, and patent examination details.

It has mentioned that such a database will conform with the mandate under the Right to Information Act to make such information available to the public.

The letter, which was sent last week, has also been sent to the National Knowledge Commission chairman Sam Pitroda, Union commerce and industry minister Kamal Nath, Union science and technology minister Kapil Sibal, and Planning Commission deputy chairman Montek Singh Aluwalia.

“Currently there is no way one can access details on how the patent grant/rejection decisions are made at the patent offices in India,” said Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre’s Shamnad Basheer, who led the campaign, adding the examination reports, file notings and comments made by patent officials should also be made public. “Such access is critical, as it promotes transparency and reduces the scope for corruption,” he said.

The Chennai patent office, for instance, has been in the news in recent weeks for an alleged violation of law to grant a patent to Swiss drug multinational F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd for its anti-infection drug Valcyte, without hearing an opposition filed by a patient group.

The country's drug controller is conducting an in-quiry into how the patent was granted.
In 2004, S.N. Maity, then controller general of patents in India, who granted the so-called exclusive marketing right to Swiss drug maker Novartis AG to sell its controversial drug Glivec in India, was removed from his job by the cabinet committee on appointments over allegations on irregularities in patent grant decisions.

The India patent system has made little progress in establishing a transparent database in the last decade.

“Though this work was initiated in 1996, there has not been any serious progress in this direction. Since such a resource is of tremendous value to all patent stakeholders inventors, industry, policymakers, civil society, academicians and more importantly the public, the government should even consider outsourcing this task to the private sector,” the group stated in its letter."

IP WATCH ARTICLE:

IPWatch, a website that is clearly at the forefront of independent, accurate and insightful reporting on international IP issues, has been leading the battle for transparency in global IP issues. Kaitlin Mara's well researched and comprehensive write up on the SpicyIP Petition is below:

New Push Emerges For An Indian Patent Database

"Two years after India's implementation of international trade rules on intellectual property rights, a lawyers group is rekindling a decade-old push to organise India's patent applications into an electronic database.

IP law blog ("blawg") Spicy IP has sent a petition to the India Patent Office (IPO). Citing India's status as an information technology leader and its emerging role as a patent "trendsetter" for the developing world, the petition calls on the IPO to "create a comprehensive database" of patents, including full specifications and claims. It also asked that the IPO to "upload patent office decisions," which are currently confidential, in order to foster transparency and public accountability.

"You will be shocked to know," says Shamnad Basheer, a research associate at Oxford University's IP Research Centre who contributes to Spicy IP, "that the process of having a digitised database began in India sometime in the 1990s." The UN Development Programme provided funding to the National Informatics Centre, a part of India's Ministry of Information, to create an electronic patent database, Basheer said.

India's implementation of the World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) in 2005 introduced pharmaceutical patents to India, increasing the number of stakeholders in the patent system. These stakeholders need "timely information on patents," according to the petition.

Without a database, searches for patent information become complicated, advocates say. Tahir Amin, a patent lawyer at the Initiative for Medicines, Access, and Knowledge (I-MAK), a non-profit organisation that evaluates the quality of pharmaceutical patents, said it took his team of five all of 2005 and early 2006 just "to identify the key ten to fifteen ARV [anti-retroviral] drug patents applications" I-MAK was planning on challenging. At the time, the only way to access information was to download copies of the IPO's weekly journal, which are posted online, and search each individually. Amin acknowledged there were improvements in search mechanisms in the last year, but said that difficulty remains.

In November 2006, an independently run, free database called Big Patents India, was launched by Bhaven Sampat, a professor of economics at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, who converted the IPO journals listing post-TRIPS patent applications into an online, searchable format. While Sampat is planning to expand the database, Big Patents India does not have patent information prior to 2005, nor does it contain full patent specifications, which Sampat said are difficult to get in India.

The India Patent Office could not be reached for comment at the time of writing. India's National Informatics Centre maintains a patent database, and there is a pay subscription service called Ekaswa, but according to Amin the information available is too limited to be of use.

It is possible to order a full-text patent from the IPO, but according to Amin it can take up to a month by correspondence, precious time when considering filing an opposition, he said, and showing up to the office in person can involve a wait of several hours.

Finding Prior Art
The difficulty finding India-specific patent claims is not a major barrier to determining freedom to operate, at least on pharmaceuticals, argued Washington, DC patent attorney Christopher Ohly. Most post-TRIPS patents filed in India would have been cross-filed at the US Patent and Trademark Office and/or the European Patent Office, both of which have full-text online databases, he said. However, he added, as India's pharmaceutical industry, and thus the number of India-specific patents, continues to grow, it could become a concern.

More at issue, Ohly said, is determining prior art. Basheer notes that patent examiners are under time pressure; one he spoke to said he never bothered checking for patent applications unavailable online. This means "we could end up having a new patent for a technology that has already been patented in India years before," Basheer said, just because the granted patent is India-specific and not online.

Ohly cautions that a database would not solve all problems involved with finding prior art, which is as often located in academic journals or industry publications as it is in prior patents.

A pharmaceutical industry spokesperson said that the level of financial flexibility at larger companies ameliorates some troubles faced by NGOs. Having access to proprietary patent databases, such as at Thomson Scientific and Chemical Abstracts, and the ability to hire a team of specialists to focus on locating prior art before submitting an application, makes the push for a free public database less important for industry than for public-interest nonprofits, the industry source said.

Does Lack of Transparency Hinder Use of Opposition Mechanism?
India's patent law has particularly stringent rules on patentability, mandating that without significant efficiency improvements, "the mere discovery of a new form of a known substance ... of any new property or new use for a known substance, or the mere use of a known process, machine or apparatus" does not constitute a patentable innovation (Patents Amendment [pdf]).

Because of this provision, a patent valid under US or European patent law might be invalid under India's. Lack of readily available data hinders the opposition mechanism, Basheer said, adding, "In order to decide whether to oppose a patent, I need access to the complete specification, including 'claims.'"

Since the TRIPS agreement went into effect, the IPO has published 37,000 patent applications and had only 66 oppositions filed (of these, 10 have been upheld, two rejected, and the rest await a decision), said Basheer, who believes that part of the reason for the low percentage of oppositions is the difficulty acquiring full patent specifications.

The industry source cautioned that it would be wrong to assume that patents on pharmaceuticals are bad, and emphasised that industry has a desire for quality, valid patents. Sampat said that the opposition mechanism helps ensure that quality; its goal "is not to oppose intellectual property but to bring third party expertise to bear on patents in order to nip bad patents in the bud."

Of greater concern, according to Basheer, is the fact that the comments of India's patent examiners and controllers are kept confidential. The US Patent and Trademark Office and the European Patent Office publish their examiners' notes to allow stakeholders to "see what arguments or objections are raised or amendments" are added to an application, said Amin.

The IPO strongly opposes public release of examiners' comments. Its Right to Information Act asserts that such notes will be made available only under court order.

Kaitlin Mara may be reached at info@ip-watch.ch."

Moser Baer's Pricing Strategy: The New Anti-Piracy Model?

Moser Baer, an Indian leader in digital media manufacture (DVD's and VCD's) is helping change the piracy paradigm. In a laudable initiative, they are acquiring copyright licenses to a wide range of movies and selling DVD's/VCD's for rock bottom prices.

Needless to state, this move will reduce the scope for piracy considerably. Illustratively, a normal DVD version of a movie costs around Rs 200 (USD 5) or upwards in India, whereas the version sold by Moser Baer costs around Rs 30-50 (USD 1). The pirated version also sells in places like Palika Bazaar for around the same amount (USD 1) or sometimes even more! With such low margins, pirates will find it hard to survive!!

Indeed, the use of such "mild" economic principles is a much smarter way of tackling piracy than the oft "aggressive" and terribly expensive anti-piracy campaigns carried out throughout the country. Perhaps we need to replicate this "pricing" model in the pharmaceutical sector as well, so that brand name drugs can be made available at affordable prices. As SpicyIP has been reiterating, pharma pricing is a major cause for worry--and big pharma has shown a great reluctance to price differentially in developing country markets. No doubt, in recent years, owing to pressure from civil society groups. some have adopted more reasonable and fairer pricing policies. Readers will recollect that SpicyIP carried an earlier news item of Sanofi Aventis pricing an antimalarial pill differentially in the same country!!

Apart from the "fairness" argument, such a strategy may make economic sense, particularly in a populous country like India (a potential market of 1 billion!!). Of course, parallel imports are often propped up as the key disincentive for not adopting differential pricing policies. However, as an earlier post explained, "technology" may be the right answer to this conundrum.

Incidentally, while visiting my uncle in Kerala recently, I found that his refrigerator contained medicines worth a whooping Rs 10 lakhs (USD 25,000). No--he is not a terminally ill patient with a penchant for expensive medicines! He is a leading cancer specialist-and gets a number of these freebies as samples from pharma companies. Each vial/strip was worth about a lakh (USD 2500)!

If smart thieves were to raid his house, they would no doubt head straight to the refrigerator and not the safe!!

Anyway, for those more interested in Moser Baer's revolutionary pricing strategy, see this case study by ICMR. Excerpts below:

"Moser Baer said that it would spend up to Rs. 5 billion over the next few years in this new initiative, which included plans to acquire copyrights and licenses for 7,000 movie titles in all major Indian languages...

Many analysts welcomed Moser Baer's entry in the Indian home video market and expected a shakeup in the industry. The Indian home video market was highly fragmented and affected by rampant piracy. Moser Baer said that as per a research study, India had over 26 million DVD/ VCD users and had witnessed a growth rate of over 25 percent. However, despite this high potential, the home video market accounted for only 7 percent of the total film industry revenues of Rs. 79 billion.

This was quite different from developed markets such as the US, where the home video market was as large as the theatrical market in terms of revenues. Moser Baer's entry was expected to change the pricing dynamics in the industry as the existing VCDs and DVDs were priced between Rs. 100 to Rs. 200, and Rs. 200 to Rs. 600 respectively. "Yogesh Mathur, Group CFO of Moser Baer, said that the company would leverage its proprietary technology and manufacturing strength to offer VCDs and DVDs at prices as low as Rs. 28 to Rs. 34 respectively.

The company intended to make movies more affordable for home viewing and encourage consumers to build their own personal movie library. In addition to growing the market, analysts expected Moser Baer's low-price strategy to affect the home video piracy market. However, some industry experts felt that video piracy would continue to remain active as it was the new movie releases that were mostly affected by piracy. Hiren Gada, vice president of Shemaroo Video, a leading market player in the home video market, said "Pulling down prices may curb the price-sensitive piracy-a movie being copied and sold for 10-20% of the original price.

But what will be hard to tackle is the time-sensitive piracy, which happens because, according to law, there has to be a time lag between the theatrical and home-video release of a film." Moser Baer would have to work with movie producers and film distributors to shorten the time to market a new movie release and allay their fears that the home video market could affect their business. Moreover, Moser Baer could find it difficult to provide low prices for the latest movie releases as the rights would be costlier when compared to old movies. Technology obsolescence was also a key threat. But, the company said that it was prepared and had made investments in new technologies such as Blu-ray."

Open Source for Cost Effective Drug Discovery

Dr. Samir K Brahmachari, the new Director-General of the CSIR is all set to unleash the open source revolution in drug discovery and biotechnology. The Economic Times Reports:

“For the first time ever, India plans to launch an innovate drug discovery programme roping in global IT firms, researchers, companies, and young minds at scientific laboratories to invent drugs at a fraction of the cost of an MNC-developed drug. Drug discovery has hitherto been the forte of MNC pharma giants.

The government has begun discussions with Sun Microsystems to set up web-management tools for an ‘open source’ drug discovery project, which works similar to a popular online encyclopaedia formed by articles contributed and edited by the brightest minds worldwide. The first project would be to develop medicines for tuberculosis and later extend to other diseases like malaria and AIDS.

Under the proposed project, researchers attached to institutions like the Royal Society of UK, Imperial College of London, Medicine Sans Frontiers and various Indian universities will have an opportunity to work on a drug discovery process even at an individual level. What’s more, the contribution would also fetch reward and recognition.

Corporates like the Kinetic Group, entities like the Welcome Trust and various corporate groups would sponsor these rewards. The project is likely to be implemented either by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) itself or the Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology.

‘We have already built a database of the requirements for developing drugs for infectious diseases. This would be hosted online, where individual experts could contribute in solving specific aspects of the drug discovery. Specific contracts will then be assigned to individual contract manufacturers and clinical research organisations,’ the project’s architect and CSIR’s new director general Samir K Brahmachari told ET.

‘The chemical entities thus developed will instantly become generics as the knowledge will be in public domain. This is diametrically opposite to the concept of intellectual property protection, which involves legal expenses to bar others from applying their minds on the invention,’ Mr Brahmachari said.

Mr Brahmachari also heads the department of industrial research. ‘When a thousand young students contribute in solving a complex puzzle, we are empowering them to be the knowledge leaders of tomorrow. For researchers at state-owned laboratories, it offers an exiting challenge of social importance,’ he added.

It is likely that generics makers, like Ranbaxy and Cipla, could be more interested, than MNCs, as it would be volume-based. MNCs are more keen on low-volume high-value brands.

If successful, the project would also challenge MNC drug makers claims that they invest billions of dollars in risky experiments hoping to develop one useful drug. The project will get one-third funding from the government, one-third from international sources and the rest from philanthropic entities.”

Sounds like a fantastic idea! Dr. Brahmachari’s open source strategy appears not only to challenge the notion that patents are necessary for innovation, but also the notion that investment for mass production needs monopoly incentives through patents. Look out for Spicy IP’s interview with Dr. Brahmachari in the coming week!

Moral Rights Under Copyright Laws: A Peep Into Policy - 2

As promised in my previous post, here’s more on moral rights and related policies. To start where I’d stopped, this week we are looking at an interesting survey (albeit a little dated) conducted by the Copyright Office in the US in the mid 90’s to review the waiver provision's operation to “assure that artists were not coerced by unequal bargaining power to forfeit their moral rights.” The survey “[sought] comments on artists' bargaining power relative to that of commercial users of artworks, on parties' awareness of the VARA rights and their inclusion of waiver provisions in contracts …. [etc.]” In my view, the survey provides interesting insights into the policies that ought to inform the interpretation of Section 57 of the Indian Copyright Act.

US Law (VARA – Visual Artists Rights Act) permits waiver of moral rights by a signed, written agreement specifying the work and the precise uses to which a waiver applies. As we’d discussed in the previous post, Indian law is silent on waiver (so is the Berne Convention).

Some interesting findings of the survey, to which more than 1,000 persons from 47 different states in the US filed written responses (of which 955 were visual artists and most were grossing less that $10,000 annually from their artwork), were summarized, as follows (I am selectively quoting from the summary):

1. “About three-fourths of the respondents claimed awareness of moral rights, although many who elaborated in written comments stressed the need for more education of artists.”

The need to educate artists (as well as the general public) is even more in India. As Spicy IP has discussed in numerous posts, the dismal awareness about IPRs is clear from the way the media uses “patents,” “copyrights” and “trademarks” interchangeably! A conference I had attended in Bhopal while I was in law school (this was about 10 years ago now!) was aimed at educating artists. The response was amazing – and all attendees agreed that such educational seminars should be frequently conducted.

2. “Fewer than half knew that moral rights could be waived. Seven percent of those who answered the question said waiver clauses were routinely included in artists' contracts, but nearly 40 percent said waiver clauses were part of contracts for commissioned works.”

In the Indian context, while many authors may not be aware of “moral rights” as a concept, they would probably expect that they have rights of attribution and rights of integrity, which cannot be taken away. It would be interesting to study contracts (written) between artists and contractors/publishers/broadcasters to determine whether they contain waiver provisions at all! Indeed, I suspect that there wouldn’t be too many waiver clauses – not least because there may be not be any awareness of these rights even amidst large publishing houses or contractors (I also wonder what % of lawyers and judges in India know of Section 57.)

A contract between a bunch of young architects and contractors that I reviewed recently did not contain any waiver clauses. However, the contract did list the parties whose names would be indicated on promotional or professional materials/publications relating to the project; this list did not include the names of the young architects! On being asked if their names could be included, the contractor said that the artists were free to include the drawings in their own portfolios and promotional materials but he could not guarantee that their names would appear on the promotional materials published by the contractors.

3. “Nearly one quarter of artists covered by VARA knew of artists who had been asked to waive their moral rights. Thirteen percent of artists covered by VARA said they had refused contracts because they included waivers and a similar number had insisted that a waiver clause be struck from a contract. These artists were generally those who earned more than $25,000 annually from their art or who were represented by an agent. More than half of those who had rejected a request for waiver said such rejection voided the deal.”

This, in my opinion, is one of the most important issues from a practical point of view. If waiver is permitted, wouldn’t every starving artist feel compelled to waive their rights if the only option would be not have their deal voided?

4. “Many believe that VARA does little (or nothing) to enhance the artist's inferior bargaining position relative to the buyer” and “Some artists considered the waiver provisions to be an ‘escape clause’ for buyers to avoid honoring moral rights.”

The example of the young architects I quoted above is very real and possibly not uncommon. The most important thing for an upcoming designer, author, architect or artist is for his/her name to “get out there”. The question therefore is - can section 57 be read as requiring prominent display of the names of all artists/authors/architects that create or contribute to the creation of any work - at least in a manner similar to which the names of other (more famous?) authors/contributors is displayed?

Further, can a failure to so display the name of the author, (even in the absent an agreement specifically requiring this) be considered an infringement of moral rights under Section 57? Can this right be waived? Can it be waived orally?

(PS: If anyone is aware of bylaws in architecture that do not permit architects to advertise their names on building sites, please let me know!)

5. “Some decried the limitation of statutory protection against destruction of works to those of ‘recognized stature’ as being too narrow and incapable of definition.”

Indian law doesn’t expressly contain such a limitation. However, it is intriguing that the court in Amar Nath devoted numerous pages of its final decision to demonstrating the fame of the author and the work in question.

6. "One commentator suggested that waivers should be valid only where the purchaser demonstrates a "compelling reason" for requiring one. Most saw the need for the waiver provisions for works incorporated into buildings."

This does seem fair. As one of our readers (Suchita) commented, it would be coercive to compel anyone to display a work (forever) in the guise of moral rights. Waiver of some moral rights in works displayed in buildings could therefore be necessary. However, the integrity of the work must still be maintained and the contract may provide for the return of the work to the author or other similar means of removal of the work without causing its damage or destruction.

7. "[Many] believed VARA should apply to print or broadcast reproductions of works, thus covering distortions in books, magazines and electronic media."

In India, moral rights are not limited to visual arts. In this sense, the Indian law is much broader than the law in the US.

8. “However, it was also noted that waivers are rare because artists contracts were rarely written” and “Several comments remarked that the law was unenforceable, largely because enforcement is too costly”

I would be interested in knowing the trend in India – are artists contracts written? The comment on enforcement is very true in India. In addition to costs, there are also delays in the judicial process that act as a deterrent to litigation. (Readers will recall that the Amar Nath case was finally decided about 10 years after it was first filed!). In this scenario, I welcome suggestions from our readers on how artists and authors can enforce moral rights outside of the judicial system.

The above survey was done very soon after the VARA was enacted and the United States Copyright Office did not consider it appropriate to amend the provisions of VARA at the time. The Indian law on moral rights had been in existence now for quite some time. A survey similar to the one conducted more than a decade ago in the US, along with numerous educational seminars for artists and authors may be very appropriate at this time in India. If any of our readers have information on any such seminars, please do let us know.

I have been getting a number of emails with questions and comments relating to moral rights – this is encouraging! Please do keep the comments coming – I plan to post a compilation of comments and questions for everyone’s benefit. Next week – look out for more on Right of Integrity.

Basmati redux: the Pashmina story

You can see them being sold everywhere: in the open-air stalls of Dilli Haat in the capital; in the crowded, winding lanes of Chinatown in Singapore; in the fashionable streets by the Hotel de Ville in Paris… Pashmina shawls, both real and fake, have become a global fashion statement, and can be found draped around every neck this winter. But where exactly do they originate?

In a replay of the Super Basmati yarn, troubles between India and Pakistan have been raging over the registration of the Geographical Indication (GI) tag for Kashmir-made Pashmina wool. HT reports that while Pakistan is “open to a joint GI tag”, India has said that this would be possible only in Pakistani Pashmina is proven to be of the same quality as the Indian variety.

The dispute originated when the Srinagar-based Craft Development Institute filed an application with the Geographical Indications Registry in Chennai to protect Pashmina weavers from others claiming to be authentic (See this earlier SpicyIP post). The Rawalpindi Chamber of Commerce and Industry immediately challenged this on grounds that Pashmina shawls are also woven in Pakistan’s Gilgit Baltistan region and that India could not solely claim the GI, Mint reported a few months ago.

Pashmina is not the sole case in point of a GI being disputed by different countries; Basmati has received more media attention. But there are several obvious examples that emerge, particularly in the arts and crafts, where antecedents of origin lie along the border lines in the sub-continent: Kutchi-work in Gujarat and Kantha embroidery, Madhubani paintings in Bihar…

While all of these have not been registered as GIs, there remains the nagging question: how are these entities to be treated? Neither TRIPS nor the national legislation provides for the joint registration of GIs. At best, such an arrangement will have to be arrived at through bilateral or plurilateral agreements, as the case may be.

In disputes with Pakistan over GIs, the problem is twofold, as Spicy IP’s Prashant Reddy reported earlier: the political state of affairs in the country has beset legislators with more immediate concerns; and Pakistan is yet to have a GI law in place.

One suggested solution is that of countries simultaneously registering homonymous GIs, similar to the provision under section 3, Art 22.3 of TRIPs (‘homonyms’ are names which consist of, or contain, the same identifier for different geographical places):

In the case of homonymous geographical indications for wines, protection shall be accorded to each indication, subject to the provisions of paragraph 4 of Article 22. Each Member shall determine the practical conditions under which the homonymous indications in question will be differentiated from each other, taking into account the need to ensure equitable treatment of the producers concerned and that consumers are not misled.

In Beijing earlier this year, at the International Symposium on GIs, the International Trademark Association (INTA) recommended a multilateral registry for GIs along the lines of the Patent Cooperation Treaty and the Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks.

The conflict resolution mechanism recommended by INTA is in-built in the principles of territoriality, priority and exclusivity that the PCT and the Madrid system espouse. The paper cites the example of Veracruz coffee beans, and Budweiser beer, illustrating that national offices and courts were best positioned to undertake an IPR priority examination. This model assumes that the question of priority of an IPR registration will differ from one country to another and prior IPR will not be registered in all countries where protection of the conflicting geographical indication is sought.

Lack of precedent makes it hard to evaluate whether the INTA model is workable; or if a joint-homonymous GI is feasible. There is little consensus between WTO member countries on GIs such as these; and clearly, there is an urgent need to evolve and implement a working model before the GI protection system loses legitimacy in the wake of such issues.

SpicyIP Tidbits

1. Pfizer gets a patent for its anti-HIV drug

Pfizer was recently granted a patent, by the Indian Patent office, for its HIV/AIDS treatment drug - Celzentry. This is a significant victory for Pfizer given the much publicized rejection of patents for several other drugs. Given the huge HIV infected population in India it is expected that this drug will be a major revenue spinner for Pfizer in India. As a result Pfizer’s stock shot up 7.5% on the Indian bourses.

2. Another Eli Lilly patent application is rejected

Eli Lilly’s patent application for an erectile dysfunction drug – Cialis has been rejected by the Indian Patent Office although this drug has been successfully patented in the U.S., E.U. & Japan. Cialis is the second best performer in the erectile dysfunction market after Pfizer’s Viagra. It earned Eli Lilly $971 Million in 2006 from sales in 30 countries. The patent was opposed by Ajanta Pharma who managed to successfully prove that Indian scientists from the Central Drug Research Institute (CDRI), Lucknow, had synthesised the basic components of the drug in 1970 and had secured a US patent (no: 3,917,599) for their invention five years later. The Patent Office thus rejected Eli Lilly’s application on the grounds of lack of novelty since under Section 3(d) a patent cannot be claimed for a mere new use of an already known substance. Section 3(d) strikes once again! (Readers may remember that Eli Lilly has already been denied a patent for another one of their drugs – Forteo because of the bar under Section 3(d). And of course there is the rejection of patent for Glivec because of Section 3(d).)

3. AstraZeneca’s patent application is rejected

The Indian Patent Office in Delhi has rejected global pharma major, Astra’s, patent application for its lung cancer drug – Iressa on the grounds of ‘known prior use’ – basically Section 3(d). The patent application had been contested by Indian generic major – Natco and J. M. Pharmaceuticals. Once again this drug has been patented elsewhere in the world.

4. Most Indian drug majors too in line for patent protection

The ET reports that out of the 8000 drug patent applications filed in between 95-04 about 40% are by Indian companies.

“Ranbaxy Laboratories, India’s largest drug maker, has claimed protection for 112 drugs during the period, including few which are at various stages of clinical development. In addition, Ranbaxy has also filed 30 patents in 2006, including seven for new drug delivery systems (NDDS), which are in advanced stages of development. Similarly, other pharma majors such as Cipla and Dr Reddy’s Laboratories have each sought protection for over 100 drugs.”

The ET Report goes on to warn that in reality the drug discovery pipeline is fast drying up and most of the drug companies are in fact merely tinkering around with existing drugs.

Section 3(d) therefore assumes all the more importance.

5. Sanofi, Abbot file suit against Glenmark

The ET Reports that “France’s largest drug maker Sanofi-Aventis SA and Abbott Laboratories have jointly filed a lawsuit against Glenmark to prevent the Indian company from selling a generic version of its hypertension drug Tarka in the US.”

“The two drug majors are seeking a court order blocking Glenmark from selling the drug in the US until the patent expires in 2015.”

If in case Glenmark does get the Court ruling in its favour it will have a 180 day exclusive marketing period in the USA.

6. Creativity must for claiming copyright: Indian Supreme Court

The Indian Supreme Court while ruling on a case of copyright infringement in the publishing industry reiterated the fundamentals of copyright law by saying that “novelty or invention or innovative idea is not the requirement for protection of copyright but it does require minimal degree of creativity.” The case was filed by Eastern Book Company alleging infringment of copyright of its law journal Supreme Court Cases by Spectrum Business Support and Regent Data Tech Ltd. The Supreme Court “restrained the respondents from copying head notes, footnotes and editorial notes appearing in their law journals.”

7. Danone loses trademark dispute against Wahaha

Danone recently lost its trademark battle against its JV partner in China – Wahaha. Danone seems to be in the habit of getting into trademark disputes with its JV partners. SpicyIP had reported in September that Danone is in a similar dispute with its Indian partner – the Wadia Group, over the ‘Tiger’ trademark.

8. Amul agrees to stop using 'American Dry Fruit' trademark

The ET reports the “Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation (GCMMF), the manufacturer of Amul products, has agreed to discontinue the use of the trade mark 'American Dry Fruits' for the ice-creams it launched in January this year.”

“GCMMF settled the matter with M H Foods and agreed to discontinue the use of the trade mark, a company statement said here.”

SpicyIp Tidbits

1. India says No to Removal of Trade Barriers.

1ndia on Saturday was at the forefront with Brazil, opposing a proposal of developed nations seeking removal of trade barriers to allow transfer of clean technologies.

The European Union and the United States made a joint proposal through the World Trade Organization to remove specific barriers to trade in clean energy technologies like wind turbines and solar panels as part of the long- running Doha round of talks.

Both India and Brazil termed the proposal “disguised protectionism” to boost exports from rich countries under the pretext of climate change mitigation.

2. GSK drops its patent claim on 2 AIDS Drugs.

In a relief to around 2.5 million HIV patients and generic firms like Cipla and Ranbaxy GlaxosmithKline (GSK) has pulled out the patent applications of two anti-AIDS medicines in India.

While GSK has formally withdrawn the application of Abacavir, it is learnt that the UK giant's other drug, Trizivir, is deemed withdrawn after it made a request to the patent office.

Abacavir is a second-line anti-retroviral (ARV) drug used to treat patients who have developed resistance to first-line medications. Trizivir is a combine of three ARV drugs used for first and second-line treatments. Indian firms like Cipla, Ranbaxy and Hetero, among others, already market one or both these drugs in India. If GSK had secured the patent, they would have had to pay a royalty to the company.

"The applicant (GSK) of this instant application has withdrawn the application under reference (Abacavir). Accordingly, there will be no further proceedings towards the representation, “the examiner of the Patent and Design office in Kolkata said in a order. (Economic times)

3. India Brazil slam new WTO Doha proposals

India and Brazil criticised two new sets of proposals in the Doha round of trade talks at the World Trade Organization (WTO) on Tuesday, signaling that wide gaps in the negotiations remain despite recent progress.

The two developing countries, who play a major role in the talks, said that a U.S.-EU proposal to free up trade in environmental goods was little more than a disguised attempt to boost sales of goods of rich nations.

They also said a negotiating text on "rules" -- anti-dumping, subsidies and fisheries subsidies -- was a step backwards that excessively accommodated U.S. concerns.

India also expressed alarm that the key agriculture talks were tilting too much towards the needs of rich countries and were ignoring the requirements of the sub-continent's millions of subsistence farmers.(Reuters)

Brazil India like teenage drivers in WTO talks, says U.S. Brazil and India have pushed their way to the "big table" in world trade talks and are struggling with the responsibility that it entails, like teen-agers who have just gotten their driver's license, U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab said on Tuesday.

After insisting that developing countries have more say in the outcome of the negotiations, "these countries now find themselves at the big table, or in the small room or whatever description you want," Schwab told the President's Export Council in a short briefing on the 6-year-old Doha round trade talks. (Reuters)

4. Sun settles Patent row with Novartis

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries has reached an out-of-court settlement with Novartis in the United States with regard to a patent dispute over the Swiss drug major’s Alzheimer’s drugExelon.

“Under the terms of the settlement, Sun Pharma will not market generic Exelon in the US until sometime prior to the expiration of the patents covering Exelon. The specific date on which Sun may launch and the other terms of the agreement are confidential,” said Sun Pharma in a statement.(Economic Times)

6. Nasscom wants Fast Track Courts to try Cyber Crimes.-Extend Sunset Clause to IT

The National Association of Software and Service Companies (Nasscom) has expressed ‘serious concern’ over the spurt in rupee value against the U.S. dollar. IT companies are going to be hit hard, if the trend continues at this pace for five more years,” according to the President of Nasscom, Kiran Karnik.

The association wanted the Government to essentially involve Data Security Council of India (DSCI), the self-regulatory organization (SRO) on information security, in policy decisions and confer the status of ‘consultative body’ on it.

The DSCI was in dialogue with the Parliamentary Standing Committee on amendments to the Information Technology Act, 2000, to further tighten the rules on contractual forms, digitization of signatures and intensity of punishment for cyber crimes.

Nasscom’s security initiatives suggested a ‘4E framework’ — Engagement, Education, Enactment and Enforcement.

He also wanted the Government to set up fast track courts exclusively to try cyber crimes.(Economic Times)

7. Nasscom, ICICI Knowledge Park to set up venture Fund.

The National Association of Software and Service Companies (Nasscom) and ICICI Knowledge Park are setting up a $25 million venture capital fund to help start-ups that are in the intellectual property (IP) space. The fund, to be registered with the SEBI will look after the brick-and-mortar costs of start-ups, according to Nasscom officials.(The Hindu)

7. India-Telecom 2007-‘Digital Divide to Digital Opportunities’

The Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communications &Information Technology, Government of India in association with the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce &Industry will host the 2^nd International Exhibition &Conference between the 12-15^th December 2007, Pragati Maidan, New Delhi.www.indiatelecom.org

An Indian DMCA?

We recently posted a note on Spicy tidbits about the increase in copyright notices to Indian ISPs. I picked this up and posted over at IP Think Tank about the increased pressure on ISPs around the world.

One suggestion (by Will), was that the world should take note of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) in the United States and follow suit. Canada are about to do this (though with some controversy).

For those who don’t know the detail, it creates a safe harbour (in section 512) for Internet Service Providers as long as they comply with certain guiding rules. These include: adoption of a policy for terminating service to users who are repeat copyright infringers, standard technical measures to identify and protect copyrighted works and designating an agent to receive notification of claimed infringements from copyright owners (etc).

Here’s also a link to the text of the relevant section of the Act. You can find more about it at the Patry Copyright Blog, Anti-DMCA, ChillingEffects, The Electronic Frontier Foundation and wikipedia.

So what do you think – should India enact a DMCA?

SpicyIP Tidbits

1. Who’s really winning the IP race in India?

Joff Wild, of Intellectual Asset Magazine, comments on the patent explosion in India, and who appear to be the actual beneficiaries of the policy changes in Indian IP …

Worryingly for India, perhaps, is the fact that 80% of applications come from foreign companies… It seems to me that if India is to realise its huge potential, and the undoubted creativity of its population, a lot more work needs to be done in educating businesses and other organisations on the benefits of intellectual property protection…

No-one doubts that there is an extraordinary pool of talent in India, but if you have a situation in which over 25,000 of the 30,000 patent applications the Indian patent office received over the last 12 months were from foreign entities, then there is also little doubt that a lot of Indian innovation is going unprotected.

However, there is the proverbial silver lining: the pharma sector.
The one bright light, however, could be the pharmaceutical sector… [T]he country’s generic powerhouses - which certainly do understand the importance of sophisticated patenting strategies - are now spending more on R&D. It will be interesting to see where this money goes: to find treatments for diseases that are rife in India; or to develop products for the lucrative European and North American markets.

2. CIPLA, Lawyers Collective to contest Roche patent

The Chennai patent office at Chennai is headed for more controversy over a patent granted to an anti-HIV drug made by Swiss drug maker F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd, with Indian firm Cipla and Lawyers Collective planning to challenge this, Mint reports.

This time, the drug involved is Roche’s anti-HIV one, valganciclovir…. [T]he Chennai patent office granted a patent to the drug without hearing groups opposed to this—the first time such a thing was done. Lawyers Collective, a Mumbai-based NGO is moving the Madras high court against the patent office’s decision. And domestic drug maker Cipla Ltd plans to challenge the patent by filing a post-grant opposition.

… Lawyers Collective had filed a pre-grant opposition to the valganciclovir patent application of Roche in 2006 on the ground that the drug was a pre-1995 molecule. Drugs patented elsewhere 10 years before the Indian Patents Act of 2005, are not eligible for patent protection in India.

On the basis of that provision, Cipla is developing a copy of valganciclovir, which… “is expected to get a marketing approval from the drug controller shortly and ...be available in the market by early 2008.”

3. Pfizer granted patent for important HIV therapy in India

Initiative for Medicines, Access and Knowledge (I-MAK) reports that Pfizer's Maraviroc has been granted a patent in India in June 2007.

Interestingly, the corresponding application at the European Patent Office (EPO), published as EP 1140085, is still under examination because of objections raised by the Office. The outstanding objections against EP1140085 are that the application does not sufficiently describe the invention, does not solve the problem claimed and lacks inventive step in the light of prior art. It would be useful to compare the examination report of the Bombay Patent Office…with the EPO's, but alas s144 of the Indian Patents Act does not allow the reports of examiners to be made public, a policy that must change sooner than later.

… Approved by the FDA in August 2007, Maraviroc, also known by the brand name Selzentry ( or Celsentri outside of the U.S) is being positioned as an important salvage therapy for patients that are not responding to other HIV drugs.

4. Call to boycott Novartis products

The Hindu reports
The Janaarogya Andolana Karnataka has urged medical doctors and consumers to boycott all products manufactured by the Swiss based multinational company, Novartis, till the company withdraws its case before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board seeking patent for Gleevec, a drug used to treat chronic myeloid leukaemia.

This boycott seems to be getting popular, as Mint suggests, with four state bodies of the Indian Medical Association (IMA) having passed a resolution to boycott Novartis’ products.

This is particularly interesting in context of an earlier SpicyIP post by Shamnad Basheer, where it was suggested that the Novartis case should be allowed to run its course, if only to clarify and strengthen the standards for interpreting terms in the revamped Indian IP laws:

What credibility would we have left as a country if we introduce terms such as “efficacy”, not known to any other patent regime, and then expect interested stakeholders to desist from taking up the issue before courts in the hope of gaining some clarity on how such terms are to be interpreted?

Several obvious questions come to mind: will the boycott gain ground? If yes, what are the odds that it will actually manage to reduce the prescription of Novartis drugs in India? And how will the pharma major react?

5. Negroponte’s dream project in troubled waters… again

MIT’s Nicholas Negroponte’s One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project, which wants to deliver USD100 laptops to the developing world, has been accused of stealing the design for its 'multilingual keyboard'.

A US-based Nigerian-owned outfit called Lagos Analysis Corporation (LANCOR) claims the non-profit reversed engineered its Shift2 keyboard driver source codes, reports this website.

The 'four shift key' keyboard helps the computer handle multiple languages, Times Online reports: The company… owns a patent on the design in Nigeria, and reportedly wants the Federal Court in Lagos to award it "substantial damages", and to issue an injunction which would permanently prevent the OLPC from manufacturing and selling its machine, which is called the XO.

At around the same time, the Nigerian education minister told the BBC
"What is the sense of introducing One Laptop per Child when they don't have seats to sit down and learn; when they don't have uniforms to go to school in, where they don't have facilities?"

The India-connection is also interesting: we seem to have had some sort of a love-hate relationship with the OLPC project. Last year, India virtually rejected the OLPC project, with strong disapproval from Education Secretary Sudeep Banerjee, who called it "pedagogically suspect", suggesting that investment was better directed at improving secondary education.

However, last week, ET reported that the OLPC Foundation, in collaboration with Reliance Communications, did a pilot project with a school in Khairat village in Raigadh, Maharashtra last month. Currently, 60 XO laptops, as these low-cost laptops are known, are deployed in India.

This development is even more interesting in context of earlier reports suggesting that India’s Human Resource Development Ministry was cognizant of, and interested in supporting, at least two ‘home-made’ designs for much cheaper laptops, looking to price them at an estimated jaw-dropping USD10!

Surely, this is going to be an interesting case to follow.

6. Need for an IPR Bench, says Madras HC Chief Justice Shah

In view of the increasing number and complexity of Intellectual Property Rights litigations, there is a need for a special bench, comprising judges who have particular expertise in the subject, Chief Justice of the Madras High Court A.P. Shah said at a conference in Chennai recently.

Thanks to Vijay Ramakrishnan for dropping us a line about this report:
[I]n most High Courts, IPR matters were not given preference. It was necessary to develop an IPR Bench in the High Court with judges familiar with IPR law.

“It is my desire that any interim application [in an IPR litigation] should not last more than six months, and the appeal arising out of it should also be decided within six months. An IPR litigation should come to an end within a year. Unless this time frame is observed, rights of the people will be completely lost,” he [said].

At the same conference, Justice S. Jagadeesan, former chairman of the IPR Appellate Tribunal, said procedural difficulties in the administration of IPR had led to heavy backlog, and stressed the need for a better-equipped patent application process.

Is anyone listening?

7. CTRI, Guntur gets patent for tobacco medicine

Medindia reports The Central Tobacco Research Institute (CTRI) based in Guntur in the southern Indian state of Andhra Pradesh has bagged the patent rights for for ‘solansole’ (a medicine extracted from tobacco for use in the manufacture of cancer and cardiac drugs).

As ever, the Chinese aren’t far behind: Nanjing Huaguan Development Of Biotechnology Co is into the export of solanesol, described in its promotional material as a key medical intermediate in the synthesis of cardiac drugs,anti-ulcer drugs and anti-cancer drugs.

India, which is the third largest tobacco producer, will surely like to maximize on this grant, and develop alternative uses of the crop.

8. Endnote: !ndia Incredible no longer?

The Ministry of Tourism has no title for its magazine named after its Incredible India campaign, as Brand India’s flagship logo has already been registered by a private publishing house. The ministry has filed a complaint against Durga Das Publications with the Registrar of Newspapers for India.

HT reports,
In September, the publishing house officials arrived with a copy of their magazine still called Incredible India, without the exclamation mark replacing the letter I in India. Director of the publication Sanjeet countered "We had registered the magazine’s name in 2002, even before the ministry thought of bringing out a magazine. The name belongs to us."

The decision of the Registrar of Newspapers is awaited.