A ‘Legal Issues Seminar – General IP’ (LIS-GIP) was conducted by Madhulika Tyagi, Associate Trainee on “Can Distinctiveness of Pharmaceutical Drugs be Claimed on the Basis of Shape or Colour?”. The seminar explored multiple High Court rulings which reject claims of distinctiveness solely based on the shape or colour of pharmaceutical drugs. It discussed how Courts view similarities in appearance as insufficient for claims of passing off, given that doctors prescribe medicines based on their composition rather than visual characteristics, thereby reducing the likelihood of confusion. The members analysed cases where Courts acknowledged that a drug’s presentation could imply a common source and gain secondary significance, warranting legal protection. Nevertheless, the consensus was that while trade dress theoretically could be safeguarded in pharmaceuticals, it is typically considered less critical compared to the drug’s name and formulation in legal contexts.

The presentation can be accessed here.

During last week’s Practice Work Shop (PWS) Session, Devesh Kapoor, Associate, hosted a discussion on “Should residuals in syndicated content be mandatory to protect writers and performers?”. The session began with the members exploring the impact of the digital age and the streaming boom on residuals in syndicated content. The members then went on to debate on the necessity of residuals from syndicated content as fair compensation for writers, performers and other contributors for their contribution in creation of content. The discussion concluded with an emphasis on the importance of maintaining a balanced and sustainable entertainment industry that values and fairly compensates its creative talents, while not financially overburdening the producers or unfairly cutting into their profits.

For the Legal Issues Seminar Conducted recently, Rajnish Kumar, Patent Associate, conducted a LIS – Patent Session on ‘Whether Coverage Leads to Presumption of Disclosure in a Patent Application?’. The seminar analysed the requirements of the complete specification under the Patents Act, 1970 (“the Act”). In specific, the session covered interpretation by the Courts of the distinction between coverage and disclosure in genus and species patents under the Act.

The session concluded with an insightful discussion into disclosure requirements and coverage in a patent specification and its effects. 

Interns – Aditi Singh, Aditya Singh Thakur, Chhavi Jain and Shreya Mallick have commenced their General IP Internship with the firm’s law practice.

We hope their stay in the firm during the 4 week period of their internship will be mutually enriching and that the firm and they will learn exciting things from each other!

During last week’s PWS Session, Shivanshi Gupta, Associate, led a discussion on ‘Would granting copyright to video game streaming be detrimental to the interests of video game developers?’ The session began with a discussion on the growing content of players interacting with video games and debated if players live-streaming playing video games can be considered a performance or a unique piece of work rather than mere consumption. The members further debated on whether the type of game being played in a live-stream had a bearing on a live-stream being considered a separate piece of work from the game itself. The possibility of statutory licensing for live game streaming as a means to balance the interests of video game developers and players was discussed as well. The session was fruitful as the members were able to arrive at a consensus that granting rights to live streamers is essential in the current scenario, recognizing the evolving dynamics of video game interactions and streaming.