GENERAL IPR

NO FOREIGN LAW FIRMS IN INDIA-BOMBAY HIGH COURT
After 15 years, since RBI had allowed three foreign law firms to establish in India, the Bombay High court proclaimed that the bank's decision was unjustified under the present laws governing advocates and their practice. The high court has favored a PIL filed by lawyers in 1995 against the bank's permission. The HC bench held that foreign law firms were barred from practicing in the country under the existing Advocate Act of 1961. Entry of foreign law firms into India even for practice on only non-litigious matters will not be allowed.

But on the issues of reciprocity and other rules to alter practice done by foreign law firms in India, the high court has asked the central government to take an appropriate decision. The Centre was all for paving the way for foreign law firms, but the Bar Council of India (BCI) was against letting them in.

The court stated that persons practicing the legal profession whether in litigation or non-litigation work will be governed by the Advocates Act, the Bar Council of India and the various state bar councils as well as courts to take action for professional misconduct, till the government decides to come out with a new law or amend the existing laws.

PATENT

PATENT FOR ANTI-VIRUS SOFTWARE
Aniruddha Joshi, the chief investigator of Centre of Information and Network Security (CINS), a centre of the University of Pune, has been granted patent by the Indian Patent Office, for his invention relating to a system for aggregating logs in a computer network which was filed four years ago. The patented system can limit virus attacks on computer networks as well as minimise false alerts of attacks.

The development of this system was part of a CINS project submitted to the Union Ministry of Information Technology in 2003. Mr. Joshi said that managing the security of information and networks is of utmost importance. Though there are several security systems such as firewall and antivirus, his patented system would help detect attacks as well as false alerts generated by security systems.

The project had received a funding worth Rs 4.4 crore from the government of India.

IT FIRMS FOCUS ON PATENTS TO INCREASE REVENUE

Top Indian IT firms have increased the number of patents filed in the past one year to protect revenues. TCS, the country's largest IT firm, had filed for 60 patents last year and hopes to touch the 100-mark in financial year '10-11. Wipro and Infosys Technologies are following a similar path. Ananth Krishnan, chief technology officer, TCS, says that the company started using patents to protect its revenues and to reduce risk to its business.

IT firms have learnt a hard lesson from IBM's attempt to patent the process of offshoring of US jobs as most IT companies that chose offshoring would have had to pay a lump sum royalty to IBM to use the computerised process resulting in loss of revenue. IPR protection has now become the top priority of IT companies.

The combined value of Wipro brands, patents, trademarks and rights is around Rs 180 crore. The company has filed 137 patent applications and 59 have been granted till now. Technology experts say owning software brands or IP firms will not have to pay royalty to companies such as SAP or Oracle.

JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY APL LICENSES PATENTS RELATED TO SOLAR ENERGY

The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel has licensed two patents to Florida-based Genesis Electronics Group, Inc., covering a compact power source that produces electricity from solar energy.

Genesis plans to incorporate the technology into solar-powered chargers for cell phones and related hand-held electronic devices and is developing a solar-powered charger called SunBlazer(TM). Being flexible, the self-contained power source can fit into any shape.

APL's Joe Suter, who invented the device with co-workers Binh Le and Harvey Ko, says that even the size of the battery can be shrinked.

Genesis now has exclusive worldwide rights to the U.S. patents, with the possibility for Johns Hopkins University's APL to provide research and development assistance.

U.S. COURT TO PROBE SAMSUNG CHARGE AGAINST SHARP

A U.S. court is to investigate Samsung's allegations against Japan's Sharp for infringement of its patents to make LCDs used in televisions. Recently, Sharp won an LCD patent lawsuit against Samsung in the Netherlands in which the court had ordered Samsung's Dutch subsidiary to halt imports and sales of its LCD panels and LCD TVs that use the patented technology, and to withdraw the infringing products from the market.

Sharp had earlier won another battle when the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) ruled that Samsung had infringed Sharp patents and should no longer sell infringing devices in the United States. Samsung and Sharp are also in LCD patent-related legal fights in Japan and Germany.

MORE THAN 3 MILLION PATENTS GRANTED IN CHINA

The State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) of the people's republic of China has granted cumulative 3,007,636 patents till December 7, 2009. Among them, 573,372 are for inventions; 1,340,391 are for utility models and 93,873 are for designs. It took eighteen years and four months since the implementation of the Chinese Patent Law, for the grant of the first million patents. The grant of the second million patents took four years and two months. And it took only two years and one month to reach the third million.

PATENT EXTENSION FOR LUNESTA-A SLEEP DRUG

The United States Patent and Trademark Office has extended a patent covering Sepracor Inc.'s well-known sleep drug, Lunesta, for an additional two years.

The patent was extended for 760 days and would expire on Feb. 14, 2014. The exclusivity period could be extended for an additional six months if Sepracor gets a sought-after patent extension for an indication in children.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had halted two Lunesta studies in children in July this year. Japanese drug maker Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma Co. Ltd., has acquired the Marlborough-based Sepracor in October and now functions as an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary.