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 100th issue of IPR Amicus elaborately discusses a recent decision of the Delhi High Court on patentability of computer related inventions (CRIs). The High Court has reiterated the principle that if the invention demonstrates a “technical effect” or a “technical contribution”, it is patentable even though it is based on a computer program. The Court pointed out that the effect which the computer program produces is crucial in determining patentability. Relying on the Report of the Joint Committee on the Patents (Second Amendment) Bill 1991, the Court observed that the words ‘per se’ were incorporated in Section 3(k) of the Patents Act to ensure that genuine inventions which are developed based on computer programs, are not refused patents. According to the authors, the Order also seems to indicate that the same test of patentability, viz., “technical contribution/ technical effect”, may also be applied for CRIs in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain technologies...
Ratio decidendi
Expiry of patent – Effect on suit for extended passing off – Supreme Court Larger Bench
Copyrights – Rights of author even after assignment – Kerala High Court
Patents – Post-grant opposition – New evidence cannot be filed once Controller fixes date of hearing – Delhi High Court
Copyrights – Investigating Officer of a crime and prosecution has no copyright in charge sheet filed and/or investigation done – Delhi High Court
Invention demonstrating technical effect/contribution patentable even if based on a computer program – Delhi High Court
Trademarks – Word ‘Shyam’ whether generic – Delay in action to restrain use of mark is not acquiescence – Calcutta High Court
News Nuggets
Post of Chairman, IPAB cannot be allowed to be left vacant
Sale of second-hand e-books through website constitutes ‘communication to public’ requiring authorisation by author
Recognition of efforts in making of a film – Promissory estoppel
Copyrights in film script – No monopoly in theme of illegal drug trials
Defamation and disparagement – Court passes interim injunction against YouTube blogger
Plant Variety Protection – Planting of protected variety and harvesting of fruits when not an act of production or reproduction
Standard Essential Patents – USPTO issues Policy Statement on remedies
Patent – No interim injunction when patent already expired
