Latest news with #IndianPatentsAct
The Hindu
2 days ago
- Business
- The Hindu
Will manufacture and export but not sell weight-loss drug in India, Dr. Reddy's tells Delhi HC
Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. and OneSource Specialty Pharma have given an undertaking before the Delhi High Court that they will neither sell nor market Novo Nordisk's anti-obesity drug Wegovy within India pending the outcome of a patent infringement lawsuit filed by the Danish pharmaceutical giant. The case concerns an alleged violation of Novo Nordisk's patent on its diabetes medication, semaglutide. Dr. Reddy's and OneSource, represented by senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi, respectively, informed the court that while Dr. Reddy's has been granted a licence to manufacture the contested drug in December 2024 and began production in April 2025, Dr. Reddy's currently does not hold a licence to sell the drug in India. Dr. Reddy's and OneSource gave an assurance that they will will not sell the drug in India. However, the Indian parma companies said they reserve their right to export the drug in countries where Novo Nordisk has not been granted a patent yet. These submissions were formally taken on record by the court, and the counsel for two pharma companies confirmed that the undertaking would remain binding on the company until the next hearing. Appearing for Novo Nordisk, senior advocate Sandeep Sethi argued that under the Indian Patents Act, 1970, even exporting a product that infringes a patent constitutes an act of infringement. The court, in its May 29 order, said it will consider the submission of the parties on the next date of hearing, on August 19.
Time of India
26-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Formulating CRI guidelines key to improving software patent review: Experts
New Delhi: The formulation of guidelines for examining computer-related inventions (CRIs) would help strengthen the patent examination framework for software and digital innovations , according to experts. As India positions itself as a global technology hub, these guidelines would also address the complexities of patenting CRIs while aligning with judicial precedents and the demands of emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), quantum computing, and blockchain computing, they said. CRIs comprise inventions, involving the use of computers, computer networks or other programmable apparatus and techniques related thereto and include such inventions having one or more features of which are realised wholly or partially by means of a computer hardware/software. The Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks (CGPDTM) issued the draft guidelines for the examination of CRIs on March 25 this year. "This is a welcome move, as it signals India's intent to foster innovation in high-growth sectors while ensuring that speculative or abstract concepts do not clog the patent system," KAnalysis Partner Amit Singh said. The significance of these rules grows as recent developments in the field of information and communication technology and computer science, such as advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), blockchain technology, quantum computing, cloud computing and the Internet of Things (IoT), are rapidly transforming industries and reshaping innovation. These technologies often involve complex algorithms, data processing techniques, and hardware-software integrations. This rapid pace of innovation brings a need to develop a complementary regulatory system for patent examination, the draft guidelines said, adding that creators of knowledge in the domain of CRIs have consistently endeavoured for appropriate protection of their patent rights. The objective of these rules is to bring out clarity in terms of exclusions expected under Section 3(k) so that eligible applications of patents relating to CRIs can be examined efficiently and effectively. Section 3(k) of the Indian Patents Act , 1970, excludes certain inventions from patentability. It included a mathematical or business method or a computer programme per se or algorithms. These draft guidelines "mark a significant milestone in refining the patent examination framework for software and digital innovations", Singh said. He said Section 3 has long posed a challenge by excluding 'computer programmes per se from patentability, creating ambiguity for both inventors and examiners. "The 2025 draft guidelines represent a progressive shift by incorporating judicial interpretations, notably from cases like Ferid Allani v Union of India, decided by the Delhi High Court on December 12, 2019, which emphasise that inventions demonstrating a "technical effect" or "technical contribution" are patentable, even if they involve computer programs or software," Singh added. He said that these guidelines also introduce a refined five-step inventive step test to ensure that CRIs offer genuine technical advancements over routine computational methods. However, challenges remain, he said, adding that guidelines, though comprehensive, are not legally binding, which may lead to inconsistent application by examiners or patent attorneys. "The absence of illustrative examples, unlike earlier iterations, could leave room for subjective interpretation, potentially affecting uniformity in patent grants," Singh added. Another expert said that formulation of these guidelines is key at a time when usage of new technologies like AI is increasing at a rapid pace.
Time of India
26-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Formulating CRI guidelines key to improving software patent review: Experts
New Delhi: The formulation of guidelines for examining computer-related inventions (CRIs) would help strengthen the patent examination framework for software and digital innovations , according to experts. As India positions itself as a global technology hub, these guidelines would also address the complexities of patenting CRIs while aligning with judicial precedents and the demands of emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), quantum computing, and blockchain computing, they said. CRIs comprise inventions, involving the use of computers, computer networks or other programmable apparatus and techniques related thereto and include such inventions having one or more features of which are realised wholly or partially by means of a computer hardware/software. The Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks (CGPDTM) issued the draft guidelines for the examination of CRIs on March 25 this year. "This is a welcome move, as it signals India's intent to foster innovation in high-growth sectors while ensuring that speculative or abstract concepts do not clog the patent system," KAnalysis Partner Amit Singh said. The significance of these rules grows as recent developments in the field of information and communication technology and computer science, such as advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), blockchain technology, quantum computing, cloud computing and the Internet of Things (IoT), are rapidly transforming industries and reshaping innovation. These technologies often involve complex algorithms, data processing techniques, and hardware-software integrations. This rapid pace of innovation brings a need to develop a complementary regulatory system for patent examination, the draft guidelines said, adding that creators of knowledge in the domain of CRIs have consistently endeavoured for appropriate protection of their patent rights. The objective of these rules is to bring out clarity in terms of exclusions expected under Section 3(k) so that eligible applications of patents relating to CRIs can be examined efficiently and effectively. Section 3(k) of the Indian Patents Act , 1970, excludes certain inventions from patentability. It included a mathematical or business method or a computer programme per se or algorithms. These draft guidelines "mark a significant milestone in refining the patent examination framework for software and digital innovations", Singh said. He said Section 3 has long posed a challenge by excluding 'computer programmes per se from patentability, creating ambiguity for both inventors and examiners. "The 2025 draft guidelines represent a progressive shift by incorporating judicial interpretations, notably from cases like Ferid Allani v Union of India, decided by the Delhi High Court on December 12, 2019, which emphasise that inventions demonstrating a "technical effect" or "technical contribution" are patentable, even if they involve computer programs or software," Singh added. He said that these guidelines also introduce a refined five-step inventive step test to ensure that CRIs offer genuine technical advancements over routine computational methods. However, challenges remain, he said, adding that guidelines, though comprehensive, are not legally binding, which may lead to inconsistent application by examiners or patent attorneys. "The absence of illustrative examples, unlike earlier iterations, could leave room for subjective interpretation, potentially affecting uniformity in patent grants," Singh added. Another expert said that formulation of these guidelines is key at a time when usage of new technologies like AI is increasing at a rapid pace.
Mint
25-05-2025
- Business
- Mint
Formulating CRI guidelines key to improving software patent review: Experts
New Delhi, May 25 (PTI) The formulation of guidelines for examining computer-related inventions (CRIs) would help strengthen the patent examination framework for software and digital innovations, according to experts. As India positions itself as a global technology hub, these guidelines would also address the complexities of patenting CRIs while aligning with judicial precedents and the demands of emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), quantum computing, and blockchain computing, they said. CRIs comprise inventions, involving the use of computers, computer networks or other programmable apparatus and techniques related thereto and include such inventions having one or more features of which are realised wholly or partially by means of a computer hardware/software. The Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks (CGPDTM) issued the draft guidelines for the examination of CRIs on March 25 this year. "This is a welcome move, as it signals India's intent to foster innovation in high-growth sectors while ensuring that speculative or abstract concepts do not clog the patent system," KAnalysis Partner Amit Singh said. The significance of these rules grows as recent developments in the field of information and communication technology and computer science, such as advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), blockchain technology, quantum computing, cloud computing and the Internet of Things (IoT), are rapidly transforming industries and reshaping innovation. These technologies often involve complex algorithms, data processing techniques, and hardware-software integrations. This rapid pace of innovation brings a need to develop a complementary regulatory system for patent examination, the draft guidelines said, adding that creators of knowledge in the domain of CRIs have consistently endeavoured for appropriate protection of their patent rights. The objective of these rules is to bring out clarity in terms of exclusions expected under Section 3(k) so that eligible applications of patents relating to CRIs can be examined efficiently and effectively. Section 3(k) of the Indian Patents Act, 1970, excludes certain inventions from patentability. It included a mathematical or business method or a computer programme per se or algorithms. These draft guidelines "mark a significant milestone in refining the patent examination framework for software and digital innovations", Singh said. He said Section 3 has long posed a challenge by excluding 'computer programmes per se from patentability, creating ambiguity for both inventors and examiners. "The 2025 draft guidelines represent a progressive shift by incorporating judicial interpretations, notably from cases like Ferid Allani v Union of India, decided by the Delhi High Court on December 12, 2019, which emphasise that inventions demonstrating a "technical effect" or "technical contribution" are patentable, even if they involve computer programs or software," Singh added. He said that these guidelines also introduce a refined five-step inventive step test to ensure that CRIs offer genuine technical advancements over routine computational methods. However, challenges remain, he said, adding that guidelines, though comprehensive, are not legally binding, which may lead to inconsistent application by examiners or patent attorneys. "The absence of illustrative examples, unlike earlier iterations, could leave room for subjective interpretation, potentially affecting uniformity in patent grants," Singh added. Another expert said that formulation of these guidelines is key at a time when usage of new technologies like AI is increasing at a rapid pace.
India Today
30-04-2025
- Business
- India Today
US puts India on watch list over IP rights enforcement, violations
The US has placed India on its 'Priority Watch List', citing concerns over India's intellectual property rights (IPR) protection and enforcement. The United States Trade Representative (USTR), in its latest report, dubbed India "one of the most challenging major economies when it comes to the protection and enforcement of intellectual property (IP)".According to the USTR's 2025 Special 301 Report, India's progress in safeguarding intellectual property rights has been uneven over the past year, with inconsistencies in protection and report even called India the world's most "challenging major economies" when it comes to IP enforcement. Despite India's efforts to enhance its intellectual property framework, including promoting public awareness about its significance and stepping up engagement with the US on intellectual property (IP) matters, it still hasn't made sufficient progress on several long-standing IP issues, according to the Special 301 Report is a yearly assessment by the US of intellectual property protection practices in other countries. It evaluates over 100 trading partners and identifies those that don't meet US standards for protecting intellectual property IP PROTECTION PROGRESS INCONSISTENT: SPECIAL 301 REPORTThe report discussed India's IP protection and enforcement."India remains one of the world's most challenging major economies with respect to protection and enforcement of IP," the report, which was released on Tuesday, issues continue to be of particular concern in India. Among other concerns, the potential threat of patent revocations and the procedural and discretionary invocation of patentability criteria under the Indian Patents Act impact companies across different sectors, it had earlier stated that this report is a unilateral measure taken by the US under their Trade Act, 1974, to create pressure on countries to increase IPR protection beyond the TRIPS agreement. Besides, India has maintained that its IPR regime is fully compliant with global trade norms, news agency PTI the report comes as India and the US are negotiating a bilateral trade agreement after US President Donald Trump announced tariffs on imports. Subsequently, Trump paused the tariffs for 90 and the US are currently negotiating a bilateral trade deal aimed at increasing two-way trade to $500 billion by 2030, with the report emerging in this context. The pact is also expected to help the US reduce its trade deficit with India, which stood at $41.18 billion in 2024–25.A trade expert said India has a well-established legislative, administrative, and judicial framework to safeguard IPR that meets its obligations under the WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related IPRs (TRIPS), PTI ISSUES REMAINS A KEY CONCERN IN INDIA: REPORTadvertisement"Among other concerns, the potential threat of patent revocations and the procedural and discretionary invocation of patentability criteria under the Indian Patents Act impact companies across different sectors. Moreover, patent applicants generally continue to confront long waiting periods to receive patent grants and excessive reporting requirements," the report continued to express concerns over vagueness in the interpretation of the Indian Patents Act, it alleged.
