In-house counsel from leading companies trade tips on IP protection and discuss the structures, systems and safeguards required for a successful IP strategy in India
Narendra Modi’s government vowed in September to draw up a liberal and comprehensive intellectual property (IP) policy and establish a think tank of experts to keep it informed about the latest IP issues affecting the country. In light of this, India Business Law Journal interviewed eight prominent in-house counsel on the state of India’s IP regime – its successes, failures and changes that are on the horizon.
Our coverage is supplemented by two Practitioner’s Perspectives, in which partners at intellectual property law firms offer their take on some of the current issues affecting IP protection in India.
[ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type=”show” ihc_mb_who=”3″ ihc_mb_template=”2″ ]
What new global IP developments should Indian companies with assets overseas be aware of and why?
Application of valid concepts of IP by the judiciary at all levels appears to be the biggest development. Judges who previously did not have an idea of IP showed keen interest in the subject matter and delivered landmark IP judgments, despite the vexatious issues brought out by litigants in their acts of desperation. Apart from judicial activism, the Indian government has constituted panels and think-tanks to seek a generic opinion on the draft IP policy. Further, various institutions associated with IP are actively involving themselves in assisting government agencies to cope with the critical issues to be captured in the new policy.
Badrinath Durvasula,
vice-president and head of legal,
Larsen & Toubro
The availability of public searches online for trademarks has been a significant development. In addition, India’s accession to the Madrid Protocol has also been positive, reducing costs for applicants and improving brand protection.
Dev Bajpai, executive director,
legal, and company secretary,
Hindustan Unilever
India has made some good strides in areas of IP. Some which readily come to mind are the 2013 copyright rules, compulsory licensing, and India’s accession to the Madrid Protocol. Apart from these, certain court rulings such as Delhi High Court’s ruling on revocation proceedings initiated by third parties and the Intellectual Property Appellate Board’s ruling on the importance of evidence, augur well for IP rights and suggest they are being given due importance by both the judiciary and law makers.
S Ramaswamy, executive vice-president
and group general counsel, Escorts
There have been no major developments in the last 12 months on the legislative front due to the pre- and post-election impasse, but there have been some interesting judicial decisions. One very important case was that of Leopold Café and Anr v Novex Communications, where Bombay High Court’s decision has the potential to impact various businesses surrounding the licensing of copyright works. If this decision is read correctly, it could seriously impact the business of copyright licensing.
A Delhi High Court order to block 219 websites is the other important development.
Ayan Roy Chowdhury, assistant vice-president of legal, Multi Screen Media
The most recent, important and significant development is an intensified and sharp focus on IP matters. Until recently, IP did not receive much publicity in India, but this has changed due to the coverage of a number of issues including pharmaceutical matters. The government’s proposal for an IP policy reflects this transformation.
Other important developments include the Glivec Novartis case decided by the Supreme Court; the amendment which brought Indian copyright law into compliance with the World Intellectual Property Organization internet treaties; compulsory licensing to Natco; and the increased focus of government to streamline online searches and patent information.
Vivek Mittal, legal head, Lupin
Recently, the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks (CGPDTM) has taken some big steps towards transparency in handling patent and trademark applications. The CGPDTM has launched tools to obtain real-time information on patent and trademark applications and also launched comprehensive e-filing services for patents and trademarks. As a further step towards effective communication, the Indian Patent Office (IPO) notified that it would soon communicate with applicants and agents through email to ensure transparency in the public delivery system. Although, steps have been taken to bring in transparency, there is huge delay in examining patent and trademark applications at the IPO. Recently, Delhi High Court kicked in some steps to clear the huge backlog at the IPO in terms of clearing patent applications and devising an effective strategy to maintain time-bound processing of these applications. The IPO has started an initiative to optimally distribute its workload among all four branches.
On another note, the IPO was empowered as an International Searching Authority (ISA) and International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA) under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) from 15 October 2013. This puts India in a league of 15 nations and organizations which are currently recognized at a global level as ISA/IPEA. As India has become an ISA/IPEA, the quality of standards in processing patent applications will definitely improve in the coming years. The IPO’s low fee schedule compared to other nations and organizations which act as ISA/IPEA will further help to increase patent applications filed via the PCT route.
Pranay Prabhugaunkar, IP professional, Siemens Technology and Services India
India is practically right up there with the developed nations. I am currently handling trademark portfolios in a number of countries in Asia-Pacific and India’s regime is much stronger than most countries in the region. The courts are pretty sensitive in terms of protecting trademarks. I have positive feedback in terms of trademark laws. Purely from a trademark perspective, it’s pretty easy and friendly in terms of enforcing your trademarks before the courts. However, what I’ve seen over the past few years is that the courts are happy to grant your relief in terms of restraining an infringer from continuing infringements, but the imposition of monetary damages has not been there. As a result, there are no sufficient deterrents.
Over the past year, I’ve seen Delhi High Court has started passing orders where they are awarding damages. These awards are still small, but I feel that can go a long way in acting as a deterrent. In India, most of the infringements are done by small fly-by-night operators. They aren’t really big entities. So even 300,000 or half a million rupees [US$5,000-8,000] awarded as damages would act as a deterrent. Right now what they do is they try their luck. If they are sued, they will come to court and stop that activity. The courts are happy with this and as a company, if we also get an undertaking from an infringer that they will stop using and misusing our trademarks we are generally fine with it. But from a broader perspective, it’s about how to curb these infringements in the first place.
Naval Kastia, region trademark counsel, Coca-Cola
One of the most important developments in the IP sector has been the recent decision of the central government to remove the price controlling powers of the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority, which had capped the prices of 108 drugs. Although this issue is indirectly related to IP rights, this has been seen as a progressive move by the incumbent government aimed attracting the confidence of global innovators.
Amit Thukral, assistant general counsel, Monsanto India
What should the government’s IP policy focus on and include? What pressing issues must it address?
India has a weak IP regime, in registration, protection and promotion. The policy to be formulated should centre on the dissemination of information on the advantages of IP, the economic value it would showcase for individuals and organizations, and how protection creates a win-win opportunity for creators and users. A policy is a guide note, which should specify objectives and cater to society and business interests in a balanced way. The policy should clearly address the mechanism for augmenting creativity, protecting IP generated and methods of balancing the cost matrix in the interest of society.
Badrinath Durvasula
The government’s IP policy should focus on boosting innovation and IP creation with an aim to take India into the league of the most innovative and developed nations. The policy should clearly provide for structured measures, as boosting innovation will require the creation of an entire ecosystem, for example, specialist IP courts, training on law enforcement, public sensitization on respect for IP, education, and measures to improve institutional, organizational and social innovation. The policy should address the challenges of balancing access, protection, diffusion and adoption in every sphere of technology and development.
Amit Thukral
India today lacks a robust IP ecosystem which provides effective protection and enforcement of IP rights, despite strong steps taken by the government. In my view, the IP policy should focus on raising the bar for processing patent, trademark and design applications on par with global standards in terms of time and quality. The IP policy must also aim to spread awareness about IP among academics, government officials and inventors in remote areas. Most importantly, the IP policy should address the issue of effective enforcement of IP rights in a time-bound manner. For example, the policy should set up specialized IP courts to effectively handle infringement matters. All in all, the policy should devise a strategy to take IP to new levels and comply with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, European Patent Office and other countries’ IP regimes.
Pranay Prabhugaunkar
The Indian government understands that innovation and creativity will be the drivers of economy in the future, and for any economy to evolve from a sweatshop backyard to a front runner in innovation, IP is the key: IP ownership, tradability and protection.
First and foremost, there should be specialized IP courts to adjudicate on IP issues similar to administrative tribunals, consumer courts and securities tribunals.
The government should also introduce education at the grassroots level where students are taught to respect innovation and creativity. This will go a long way in curbing the culture of piracy. This is already happening in some parts of India but these projects have to be taken to all states.
Ayan Roy Chowdhury
The government’s IP policy should focus on: (1) Using intellectual property to bring about a culture of innovation. IP should be an integral part of any innovation that is fostered. (2) Exponentially promoting knowledge and understanding from an early stage. Schools could consider introducing IP as part of their curriculum to give younger people a basic understanding of IP principles. (3) Building a culture whereby one’s own IP or that of others is valued and nurtured. (4) Rewarding people, especially entrepreneurs and organizations that foster and protect intellectual property like patents, so that we are able to inculcate and promote such behaviour. (5) Treating IP violations seriously and bringing about rigour in enforcement.
While putting in place an IP policy, it is critical for the government to also look at areas such as biodiversity and bio-resources. The IP policy should also keep in mind newer ways of engaging with consumers such as electronic, internet and mobile commerce.
Dev Bajpai
While it is true that India needs to catch up with the world on making its IP robust, it is also true that the West, especially the US, is increasing pressure to protect its own turf and commercial interest in wanting India to be TRIPS [Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights] compliant. The government has already indicated its commitment to its stand on IP rights.
It is also a welcome sign that the US has agreed to resolve its IP issues with India through negotiations and talks.
Recently India’s commerce and industry minister, Nirmala Sitharaman, said that “India has well established IPR laws, but it is important to spell it out in the form of a policy for the entire world to see.” I completely agree with this statement. The real problem, as the minister says, is “the absence of a proper framework”. It is also true that “we are very strong in IPR and we certainly want to protect our interest … just because we do not have a policy, they are picking holes in our IPR regime”.
The most important issues which need to be addressed are: modernization of our IP offices in line with digital technology; the need for more patent examiners; more experts across IP domains; a reduction in the time span for granting approvals; and more awareness and training from the grassroots level to make people in general aware of IP and IP rights.
S Ramaswamy
India already has a defined IP direction, which is very well reflected in its legislative changes, be it compulsory licensing, section 3(d), or section 3(j) of the Patents Act, 1970.
In my personal view the policy should be a balance between a driver and being driven away. To give an example: after issues such as the interpretation of section 3(d) of the Patents Act and compulsory licensing came to the light, a lot of innovator companies began lobbying for changes in India’s IP regime with the view that the regime is not protective enough and would stifle innovation. If the IP regime is to change then it should guarantee increased innovation and manufacturing in India rather than increased sales of already innovated and manufactured products.
The policy must address crucial terms used under various acts such as section 3(d) of the Patents Act, defining the scope of efficacy and significant difference in the context of efficacy; develop a regime to protect trade secrets; and create and maintain repositories.
The policy must act to protect India’s interest on IP-related matters and help judicially resolve IP issues being raised by developed nations.
Vivek Mittal
What have been the biggest failures in terms of IP protection and
enforcement and where is there room for improvement?
The ratio of the number of patent applications disposed by the Indian Patent Office to the number of patent applications filed every year is very low when compared with other countries such as the US and China. Normally, it takes around six to eight years for a patent grant as compared to two to four years in other countries. The quality of patents granted by the patent office is another area of concern. This makes patent enforcement in court more difficult. The same applies to trademark matters.
Moreover, in India, the judiciary is not well equipped to deal with IP infringement cases on a speedy basis. Due to the absence of special IP courts, it takes lot of time to receive decisions on infringement matters. In addition, the judges and examiners have a lack of awareness of IP and of the seriousness of IP protection. For effective protection and enforcement, more IP awareness programmes need to be organized and a dedicated workforce must be deployed at the IPO and in courts. The workload also needs to be balanced out across the patent office branches for speedy examination. Special IP courts need to be set up in each jurisdiction to handle IP infringement cases on a speedy basis.
Pranay Prabhugaunkar
An amendment which diluted the protection available to a trademark owner in India against parallel imports is disappointing. The amendment, made through a circular, removed the reasonable restriction of seeking a trademark owner’s consent before making parallel imports into India. This is a retrograde step by the regulators as it was done without a change to the parent law and without keeping domestic interests in mind.
In September 2003, when the new Trade Marks Act was introduced, it had several progressive provisions, such as making offences under the Trade Marks Act cognizable [i.e. a court order is not required to take someone into custody]. Unfortunately, while the offences were made cognizable, a significant limitation was put in place that required a written opinion to be procured from the Trade Marks Registry before the police could take action on an infringement or passing off complaint. This is a story of one step forward and two steps backward. Actions under the Trade Marks Act to enforce trademark rights have virtually come to a stop. The law has been in the statute books for more than 10 years but scarcely used and should now be deleted from the act and the rules.
Non-implementation of the well-known trademark provisions in the manner envisaged in the Trade Marks Act, 1999, is another area of failure. More than 10 years have passed and the government has laid down detailed provisions on the issue of such trademarks, but has done precious little.
Each element of IP, namely patents, trademarks, copyright, designs, etc., must be viewed differently, keeping domestic interest in mind. Even international conventions suggest that states can make laws to suit their interests within the overall framework laid down by these conventions. Somewhere in the last few years, this aspect has not been considered and has been given the go-by.
Dev Bajpai
Piracy is the most disruptive and disturbing aspect, not only in India but the world over, and consistent absence of effective initiatives by the government to counter this problem may have far reaching consequences. The law needs to be changed to make the manufacturing of CDs illegal and only to be allowed under licence. Secondly, digital rights management provisions need to be effectively implemented across the board and against all players. Procedural law relating to IP piracy should be streamlined and effectively implemented.
In addition, IP adjudication needs to be improved by setting up specialized courts or tribunals.
Ayan Roy Chowdhury
Enforcement is really good in India. At least I can say for the high courts, that if you have a strong case in your favour, you will get relief. The courts are quite pragmatic. I have no complaints in terms of enforcement. There is room for improvement for the entire process of registering IP. For example, the process to register a trademark needs improvement. The staff at the IP offices need better training. There has been some improvement – five years ago you couldn’t even estimate how long it would take to register a trademark. Now it’s better but there’s still a lot of scope for improvement.
Naval Kastia
A better word instead of “failure” would be “concerns”. These would be a lack of clarity on various terms used under IP laws in India such as under section 3(d) of the Patents Act. Another concern which is not completely highlighted is the difference in thinking between legislators and the judiciary. The government’s policy could resolve this.
Developed countries use IP as a business enabler; they frame policies and take initiatives with that in mind. India has to follow suit. The US Trade Representative Special 301 Report is a classic example of that. Any IP regime must focus more on protecting India’s businesses.
Vivek Mittal
The biggest failure in terms of protection and enforcement in the IP sector is a lack of development and deployment of specialist courts in every state to deal with IP infringement issues. Barring the metros, IP owners face serious challenges in securing judicial redressal on infringement issues as most courts do not have judicial exposure to IP laws. The need for timely adjudication and accurate, consistent case outcomes is the same for a small town innovator as for a large corporation and this need is consistent across the length and breadth of India. Thus trained IP division courts are needed in all states of India and not just in the metros.
Amit Thukral
IP protection requires a deep sense of understanding by creators, administrators and protectors. In the absence of a robust IP policy, the executive and judiciary lack a sense of direction, and if any failure could be pointed out, it is in the matter of a deficiency of service relating to IP protection. This anomaly will be rectified once the IP policy is brought in place.
Badrinath Durvasula
I feel in areas of piracy and counterfeiting, we really need to strengthen our laws, courts and administrative machinery. We should also address weaknesses in areas such as data protection, and enforcement of civil remedies and criminal penalties. Improving IP training is equally essential.
S Ramaswamy
What IP issues does your company most frequently have to confront? How easy or difficult has it been to resolve these issues and what have you done to overcome them?
Since we are in the manufacturing sector we are besieged with issues of design, patent and copyright violation along with counterfeiting. We have a robust IP documentation policy and training is a focus area. We also periodically carry out knowledge sharing on important IP topics. Very often mediation is a preferred route rather than litigation with warring parties and we have been successful in our pursuits through this route.
S Ramaswamy
Being a company in the broadcast business, it is mostly copyright that occupies our activities in respect of IP along with trademark-related issues. Amendments to India’s copyright law have posed serious challenges both from an operations and management perspective and it will be some time before the dust surrounding these amendments settles.
Ayan Roy Chowdhury
As a company, we face problems due to counterfeit goods and brands in India. Counterfeiting has been on the rise in India as our laws are not stringent enough to tackle it. The judiciary is not equipped to deal with such cases on a speedy basis. Counterfeiters take advantage of this and continue with their illegal activities, resulting in heavy losses for our company in terms of sales and goodwill. To stop these acts, we have no option but to take the legal route if the counterfeiting continues following our warnings.
Another issue involves submission of working statements for our Indian patents to the Indian Patent Office. The IPO requires the patentee or the licensee to submit information indicating whether their patented invention is worked or not worked in India. The information should also indicate the quantum and value of sales of the product manufactured in India and imported from other countries if the patented invention is worked, or indicate reasons for non-working and steps taken for working of the invention. Failure to furnish the information may result in up to six months imprisonment and a fine of up to ₹1 million (US$16,000). In a large company like ours, where a number of products are being manufactured and marketed around the world every year, it is always cumbersome and time consuming to obtain information regarding the patented inventions commercialized in India from our audit and sales teams. Also, it becomes difficult to determine the quantum and value of sales of the product covered by the patented inventions, especially when several patented inventions are part of a big project.
Pranay Prabhugaunkar
Common to our industry is the violation of IP in various formats. With the existing arrangement and network of active associates, our industry attempts to have its own ways and means to protect IP, which is no different than any other industry. But the moot point would be the concern of our industry to have the desired level of protection and administration in the areas of IP where we operate.
Badrinath Durvasula
Some of the issues we have had to deal with include parallel imported goods, both genuine and fake, and the manner that they are dealt with; locally made fake goods, infringement and lookalikes and varying levels of their enforcement in different states; supply chain leakages from third-party manufacturers, printers, etc.; and the pendency and management of IP cases.
At Hindustan Unilever, we have been constantly partnering with state and central authorities in sharing learning and best practices. Over the years, we have held several sessions for enforcement authorities to share knowledge that we have through our international experience. We have taken up important policy matters with the government and have been also playing a key role in terms of suggesting amendments to regulations.
Dev Bajpai
The issues faced by a company like ours are general in nature. These include dealing with the lengthy period of time required to grant the registration of patents and trademarks and a patent’s term starts from the date of filing. The lack of infrastructure to support the volumes of work and the not-so-reliable online searches are among other problems. There are many other operational issues. One example is the stress laid on substantiating usage of trademarks via invoices, which proves to be cumbersome. In cases where the usage dates back more than 20-25 years, it is very difficult to prove usage as old invoices cannot be preserved and produced. Even if produced, they may not be legible enough to be used as evidence.
Vivek Mittal
Being an innovation-led company, we confront IP-related issues almost daily. They could be in the form of non-compliance of technology licence conditions or issues with appropriate registrations or trademark, patent or plant variety infringements, or trade secret-related conundrums. Each of these issues will range in its complexity and have to be dealt with appropriately. We have been particularly successful in resolving our infringement issues through innovative litigation strategies, such as seeking enforcement of one form of IP to protect another.
Amit Thukral
We face issues in terms of infringements of our trademarks. Infringers are usually small traders who are not based in metropolitan cities. We face the problem of numbers because there are too many of them.
We try and resolve these as far as possible out of court. We try and educate these infringers because most of the time they are not really aware of IP laws. They don’t realize that what they are doing is actually against the law. So in the majority of cases, once we speak to them and educate them, they generally cooperate. In cases where our efforts don’t bear the result we are looking for, we do approach the courts for an injunction. Until now we’ve had a very good success rate.
Naval Kastia
What new global IP developments should Indian companies with assets overseas be aware of and why?
In June, the US Supreme Court delivered a landmark decision in the case of Alice Corporation v CLS Bank International. This case decided the future of software patents in the US. The Supreme Court held that claims in Alice’s patent did no more than a generic computer function, which is not enough to transform an abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention and was hence invalid. Following this decision, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), which had indicated several applications as allowable prior to the Alice case, withdrew the notice of allowance for some of those applications due to the presence of at least one claim with an abstract idea that required no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions. These applications are currently being re-examined by the USPTO. Also, US courts have invalidated a bunch of patents which claim abstract ideas and it appears all of this is having an impact.
Many Indian as well as multinational companies have secured software patents and continue to file a lot of software patent applications in the US. However, in light of the recent court decision, Indian companies should assess beforehand whether their software ideas do enough to transform an abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention. A filing decision for protection in the US should be made based on this assessment
Pranay Prabhugaunkar
Indian companies should be aware of the anti-counterfeiting alliances that exist outside India and use them to safeguard their IP assets. Pick up best practices on enforcement from bodies such as Business Action to Stop Counterfeiting and Piracy, the International Trademark Association, the International Chamber of Commerce, etc.
Dev Bajpai
The potential disconnect on the level of IP protection in India versus the rest of the world cannot be understood overnight.
However, the need for attention to global protocols such as the Madrid Protocol should be well comprehended by companies with assets overseas.
Otherwise, the inherent danger of a lackadaisical attitude with which companies are grown at home could result in an untold economic downfall when they operate globally.
Badrinath Durvasula
Most importantly, one has to keep track of TRIPS. Indian companies with assets overseas must be aware of all IP-related developments within the countries in which their assets are located. It also depends on their area of business.
One has to track laws accordingly. For pharmaceutical companies like ours, changes to patent regimes are very important, while for media companies changes in copyright laws could be of significant interest.
Vivek Mittal
Easier access to content also makes it vulnerable to reproduction, and storage is easier than in the past. This tension between evolving technologies and methods to contain its piracy remains the challenge globally.
Ayan Roy Chowdhury
Indian companies overseas have to be fully geared up with respect to IT advancements and protection. The Western world deals more in e-commerce and thus IP protection through IT-enabled services is crucial, along with software data protection. Indian companies need to shore up their bottom line for innovation to increase expenditure on research and development.
S Ramaswamy
When it comes to trademarks, Indian companies should be mindful of the nuances of each jurisdiction.
The law can vary and it’s basically broadly split into two types of jurisdiction – a first-to-use jurisdiction and a first-to-file jurisdiction.
There are a lot of countries where if you haven’t registered a trademark, you practically have no rights. Sometimes what happens is that because you are in India and your country places more emphasis on using a trademark – even if you have not registered it – you still have common law rights.
But there are a lot of countries where you only get rights in a trademark through registration. So it’s really important to know which jurisdictions these are and to have adequate protection.
Naval Kastia
What key IP challenges do you think Indian companies will have to face in the coming year? What preparatory measures and risk mitigation do you recommend as a result?
India, being a developing economy, always vacillates between public policy and protectionism. In this context, not only in the next year, but in years to come, there will be a conflict of interest between an IP regime and good governance. Eventually, and over a period of time with an effective IP policy in place, this disconnect will be ironed out and a good IP regime will settle down in the form of a regulatory regime.
Badrinath Durvasula
One of the key IP challenges for Indian companies is to counter IP crime such as counterfeiting and piracy, which is on the rise due to globalization and advances in technology. Such acts cause heavy losses to industry in terms of sales and goodwill. Indian companies need to devise a strong enforcement strategy to counter such crime. Certain measures such as spreading brand awareness among the public, effective IP policing programmes, making the public aware of counterfeit and pirated goods, etc., must be implemented. Setting up a watch service to monitor third-party products and services, and drafting and sending out cease and desist letters to suspected infringers are important for an effective policing programme.
Pranay Prabhugaunkar
Countries and companies from the West, especially the US, will put pressure on Indian companies, especially pharmaceuticals and agro-chemicals, due to the judgment on the Novartis cancer drug Glivec and the decision to allow Natco to sell a generic version of the Bayer-Onyx cancer drug Nexavar. Indian laws need to therefore be balanced and provide protection to home-grown pharmaceutical companies to bring out improved generic versions and at the same time also provide IP rights to multinationals. The government’s new IP policy will play a very crucial role in this regard.
S Ramaswamy
The integration of global markets will further squeeze the rights of IP owners and the territorial nature of IP right holders could come in for far more questioning. As IP awareness increases and courts also recognize the need for enforcement, IP will become one of the most important and valuable intangible assets and will gain the recognition it deserves. This could also lead to an increase in litigation.
Dev Bajpai
As Indian companies grow, innovate more and get globally competitive, they will face a myriad of IP challenges both in India and in jurisdictions outside of India. These could range from straightforward domain name issues to complex patent or trade secret infringement challenges. Indian companies need to have well defined IP management policies to tackle these challenges.
Amit Thukral
The challenges in India will be clearer following the introduction of the new IP policy. However, issues currently of concern are related to the grant of patents, being able to “work” the patent in India, the validity of patents in India, increased internet piracy, etc.
The only preparation that can help is good homework and better vision in registering and enforcing IP.
Vivek Mittal
What three tips would you give IP owners about protecting their assets in India?
As a general counsel my advice is covered by the adage “publish and perish, protect and prosper”. Taking this forward do the following: register your IP rights; weigh up the economics of litigation before any action is contemplated; and have strong documentation including IP-related clauses in both company and employee contracts.
S Ramaswamy
IP owners have to understand the importance of the assets that they own and give attention to nurturing and fostering these assets.
IP will always be undermined if IP owners do not possess this mindset. IP owners should also encourage others to create,
nurture and protect their IP assets.
In addition, all IP owners should maintain records of anything that strengthens and consolidates their IP rights and formulate and implement strategies to effectively enforce their rights.
Dev Bajpai
My tips would be: (a) be educative in the domain of IP and give due importance to its protection; (b) be sensitive to public needs and protect IP in a way to assist people; and (c) be in sync with public policy on IP and desist from acts which are not warranted.
Badrinath Durvasula
The three tips I would give are: (1) actual use of a trademark in India is more important than mere registration; (2) enforcement is the key to maintaining your trademarks, otherwise you risk making your trademark generic – if several people start using it, it loses its exclusivity and distinctiveness; if you see an entity in the market using your trademark or a similar one, it’s very important to take action against them; and (3) educate consumers, traders and infringers about your IP rights as general awareness of IP rights in India is low. Educating people would go a long way.
Naval Kastia
Three tips for protection are: (1) protect your IP based on its business value and register your IP rights as early as you can; (2) always seek advice from Indian IP rights experts such as IP attorneys; and (3) take necessary steps to prevent infringements of your IP rights by devising a strong enforcement strategy.
Pranay Prabhugaunkar
First, ensure that procedures involved in protection are pursued as soon as possible, preferably during the early part of a product’s development cycle so that the protection proves to be more meaningful to the asset owner.
Second, vigorously enforce the rights obtained to prevent dilution of these rights.
Third, pay attention to various aspects of IP which deal with post-registration procedures such as renewals, rectifications and defensive protection mechanisms set out to protect one’s IP assets.
Vivek Mittal
[/ihc-hide-content]
