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.
A domain name can be used to uniquely identify an entity and can function as a source identifier on the world wide web. Elaborating on the anatomy of a domain name and the its registration, the author points out that second-level ‘names’ of the domain names are registerable under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 however, the authorities register domain names on a ‘first come first serve’ basis, sans a thorough conflict check. The article further discusses both the ways of dispute resolution in India with respect to domain names. It explains the .IN Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (‘INDRP’) and the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The author points out that while even the registration under the Copyright Act, 1957, for works that can be applied to goods and services, is subject to a search certificate from the Trade Marks Registry, no such mechanism exists for domain names. According to the author, there is the need for a mechanism for assessing domain names being registered to prevent duplicity of domain names and minimize confusion and deception amongst the relevant consumers...
Ratio decidendi
Copyrights – Commonality of arrangement of known elements must be demonstrated for infringement – Bombay High Court
Patent in pharmaceutical composition – ‘Comprising’, an open-ended term – Subsequent steps cannot affect earlier patent – Delhi High Court
Statutory licensing – Broadcaster to comply with terms and conditions of Section 31D read with Rule 29(4) – Delhi High Court
Trademarks – No scope of confusion when trade channels catering to different consumers are different – Delhi High Court
Territorial jurisdiction to injunct foreign company not present in India – Mere accessibility and interactivity of website are not sufficient – Delhi High Court
News Nuggets
Comparative advertisement when may amount to denigrating competitor’s trademark
Royalties for broadcasting sound recordings and literary & musical works in sound recordings – Delhi High Court invites suggestions
Trademark ‘Doctor PAN’ is not publici juris
Use of even earlier mark of another party when fatal
Territorial jurisdiction of Court – Offer of physical services in location
Mark BURJNOIDA can be used for ongoing project though injunction granted against use of BURJBANGALORE, BURJMUMBAI, BURJDELHI, etc.
WTO set to extend moratorium on non-violation and situation complaints in IP
Inventive step – Admissibility of post filing data – Question referred to EBA
