We are a family of strong 800+ people including 470+ professionals working from 14 locations across India.
We have a rich heritage and enduring legacy which are pivotal in shaping trust, excellence, and unparalleled legal expertise, thus building a strong reputation and a trusted brand.
We started in 1985 in a single room set up by the two founders with no prior experience of working in a law firm. Both the founders had outstanding academic records and focused on their deep understanding of the law to form the foundation of the firm.
Integrity, Knowledge and Passion are the principles that resonate with every member of our LKS family and the work that we do. These values drive us to build a community of legally sound professionals and well-serviced clients.
Everything we have accomplished over the last four decades is a result of our unique way of thinking which is deeply influenced by our core values and principles that define us.
We and our professionals consistently garner appreciation for the quality of our services and the depth of our legal expertise. This consistent acknowledgment serves as a testament to our unwavering commitment to exceed expectations.
The article in this issue of IPR Amicus discusses elaborately a recent decision of the Delhi High Court on the question as to whether the communication of a sound recording to the public also amounts to communication of the literary and musical works embodied in the sound recording to the public. Observing that a sound recording is not the sum total of lyrics and musical works only, the Court held that the sound recording is something more. It was of the view that neither the owner of the copyright in the literary work nor the owner of the copyright in the musical works has any claim or right in the sound recording which is a work of joint authorship within the meaning of Section 2(z) of the Copyright Act, 1957 and is a distinct work produced by the collaboration of two or more authors. It was also held that the 2012 amendment in Section 19(10) of the Copyright Act was not retrospective in nature. Dismissing the suit brought by the Indian Performing Right Society (‘IPRS’), it observed that exploitation by the Defendant was admittedly only of sound recordings forming part of cinematograph films through radio broadcast. However, in another suit which involved live performances of musical/lyrical works through other artists, it was held that exploitation was not of the sound recording but of the underlying works and license from IPRS was necessary...
Statute Update
Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) set to be abolished
Patents – Fees payable by eligible educational institutions set to reduce
Ratio Decidendi
Trademark – Common nature of the word is not sufficient determinant to refuse relief – Bombay High Court
Patent infringement – Interrogatories under Order XI Rule 2 CPC when not permissible – Delhi High Court
Trademarks – Registration of label mark not confers exclusive right to use of word therein – Madras High Court
News Nuggets
Trademark ‘It’s like milk but made for humans’ has distinctive character
Infringement of trade dress and packaging – Non-adoption of similar trade dress earlier fatal
No likelihood of confusion between collective mark HALLOUMI and figurative mark BBQLOUMI
Copyright infringement in software needs to be nipped in the bud: Delhi HC
Trademark infringement – Continuation of ex-parte interim injunction for long not material when plaintiff’s hand unclean
IPAB – Technical Members can function without a Chairman
Patent pre-grant oppositions – IPAB lays down guidelines for disposal
