Trademark Search: No more paying of Rs 400/15 min

Finally, Indian Patent Office (IPO) has made a notification stating that Trademark Search will be available to the public free of cost. Now, the trademark search can be conducted without any charge through the public search interface at IPO website. Earlier, a fee of Rs 400/- has to be paid in favor of IPO in order to conduct a search for 15 min and the search could be conducted only for a specific class. Such an initiative taken by the Indian Patent Office can be seen as an efficient measure towards enforcing the trademark rights.

In addition to that, The Patent & Trademark Office has also increased the fee from Rs 2,500/- to Rs 3,500 /- for filing of application to register a trade mark for a specification of goods or services in one class. The notification has been into effect from the date of notification (29.12.2010). All applicants/agents who have filed trade mark applications from 29.12.2010 onwards have been requested to tender the deficiencies in fees Rs 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) per application in respect of applications filed from the date of notification till issuance of this notice, on or before 30th . January, 2011, failing which the Registrar shall not act on the matter until the said additional fee has been paid. The deficiencies of fees received thereafter shall result in shifting of filing date to actual date of payment of balance fees.

Indian Patent Office issued notice to websites

Recently, Indian Patent Office has released a notification, which clearly signals India’s objective towards a more effective enforcement of the Intellectual Property Regime in the country.

The notification directs towards websites which are casting itself as being related to the Indian Patent Office. The notification gives reference of Section 108 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 which states that "If any person uses on his place of business, or on any document issued by him, or otherwise, words which would reasonably lead to the belief that his place of business is, or is officially connected with, the Trade Marks Office, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both". To keep it simple, the act defines provision of penalty for improperly describing a place of business as connected with the Trade Marks office. It has also been mentioned that complains had been lodged against such website. Such issue clearly comes under the purview of cyber-squatting. IPO has given a 7 day notice to discontinue such websites; notwithstanding such notice, action will be taken by the Controller General against the organizations.

The Patent office has not disclosed the name of such organizations which may come under the purview of such legal action. But, this notice is a red signal for the websites which are being said as misguiding the public as being connected to Indian Patent Office.

Dr.P.L.Gautam, newly appointed Chairperson of PPV&FR Authority

Our readers might know that Dr. S. Nagarajan was appointed as first Hon’ble Chairperson of Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority (PPV&FRA). The Hon’ble Chairperson was appointed to fulfill the mandate of established authority under the PPV&FR Act, 2001.He has given momentum to the registration and various processes related to plant variety protection in India. Under the valuable guidance of Hon’ble Chairperson, Authority has organized various National Consultative seminars (here), Advocacy program, Workshop, Review meetings (here). In his tenure the registration process started and certificates were rewarded to the respective person or organizations for many crops. It is evidently clear that his tenure was very successful and India’s Plant Variety Protection regime received a good initiation.

As earlier (here), Government of India (GOI) invited applications for the post of Chairperson of Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority (PPV&FRA), New Delhi. We have posted earlier (here) about the notification, manner of selection, tenure and role of Chairperson.

We are glad to inform you that one of the eminent scientist, Dr. P. L. Gautam (profile here) has been appointed as new Chairperson of the Authority.

He has provided his services as (i) Chairman of the National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India since December 31, 2008.(ii) Deputy Director General of Crop Science Division of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) (iii) Vice- Chancellor, GBPU&AT, Pantnagar (iv) Director, National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources (NBPGR, ICAR). He has hold various other responsible position and extended his expertise support.

We are still waiting to receive the official notice in Plant Variety Journal (PVJ). But, the authority has updated the name of Dr. P. L. Gautam as Chairperson in its website (here). Subsequently, NBA has issued fresh notification (here) to fill the position vacated by Dr. P. L. Gautam.

We hope that more transparency will come in various procedures being followed before the Authority and by the authority. Plant Variety Protection will facilitate the growth of seed industry in the country which will ensure the availability of high quality seeds and planting material to farmers. We wish his tenure will extend support to Indian farmer, private and public seed sector.

For any clarification, if required then please contact to;
Onkar Singh,
onkarsingh.naarm@gmail.com
9573602808

In Defense of Patenting of Gene

With voices raging hard against patenting of gene in United States, Boston Editorial Globe is acknowledging the importance of gene patents to biotechnology.

Gene patenting is one of the most obvious controversial subject and over the past three decades, much of the ink has been spilt about the ethical issues related to it, in particular with regard to the issue of

patenting DNA sequences isolated from the human genome.

The issue of gene patenting gained limelight when a Utah based diagnostic firm, Myriad genetics was granted a patent on two breast cancer related genes BRCA1 & BRCA2. Myriad having the patent right is the sole provider of these tests related to the genes in United States while blocking other laboratories from offering tests based on those genes. The patents created much controversy and were soon brought in the court of justice. In the recent judgement, as mentioned in editorial US District Court Judge Robert Sweet sided with the plaintiffs by ruling that Myriad’s claims over “isolated’’ BRCA genes are invalid because the genes are “not markedly different’’ from DNA that exists in nature, and phenomena of nature are not patentable. The judgment is itself questioning the novelty criteria defined by Patent laws, which states that genes “isolated and purified” creates requisite novelty.

Having said this, there is still of course need to address, the very legitimate, and clearly urgent, question of whether gene patents serve the larger goal of advancing medical research and promoting the creation of therapies. Intellectual property has been expanding with the advancement of science & technology, and there is an utter need to devise new rules through the panel of experts; rather than developing new system in courtrooms.

When the human genome was mapped it was thought that it will revolutionize the treatment of incurable disease. What they didn’t expect that it genes would also be patented like the as inventions. Gene patenting has been under attack for several years. Inventions do not move from the laboratory to the marketplace without a huge investment of money, time, and effort.

Perhaps there is need to address this issue by the congress, with discussing the pros and cons of allowing these kinds of patents to remain valid and continue to be granted, as whole future of modern biotechnology industry is dependent on it.

Why IPR ??????

Intellectual property Rights as the name suggests “the rights given to a person for his creative work”. Everyone who matters in the scientific sector is talking about IPR and the importance of protecting scientific discoveries with commercial potential. In any discussion in public and private sector the first question asked “Has our IPR been protected? ”
Liberalization & globalization has dramatically altered the perception about science and its practices in India. IPR has become important in the face of changing trade environment which is characterized by the following features namely global competition, high innovation risk, short product cycle, need of rapid change in technology, high investment in R&D, production & marketing and need of highly skilled human resources
Being graduated from the field of Biotechnology I know that lot of R&D work is being going on in the field of biology and the sector of R&D require huge investment. To justify such a huge investment cost in R&D companies want to gain a competitive advantage. From here our works starts, I think that IPR management plays a crucial role
in managing the innovation by providing them legal protection. Only by getting temporary monopoly profit can such companies continues to invest in R&D on long-term basis. Business world is going day by day dynamic and competition is globalized. As a result legal protection strategies are made to ensure freedom of action and block competition Only .6% of the innovative idea is being successful & this success rate is very less (1 in 10000) in the pharma sector. Thus IPR has become a suitable instrument for influencing sustainability & return-on-investment.