IP News Updates: June 2022
Updated: Jul 13, 2022
Puma Decides to Withdraw its Special Leave Petition in a Copyright Infringement Suit
Puma was alleged of copyright infringement by Phonographic Performance Limited for playing unlicensed songs in their outlets in a mall in Punjab. Puma denied the complaint by stating that they had valid licenses over the songs for all of their stores. An FIR was registered against Puma for the same, which was requested to be squashed. On denial, Puma approached the High Court and subsequently the Supreme Court. The High Court denied their plea, but granted an interim injunction instructing the investigative authorities to not harass Puma officials, subsequently, Puma requested to withdraw its Special Leave Petition.
The Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) backers, Yuga Labs, sue satirist Ryder Ripps
Yuga Labs has alleged that Ryder Ripps has infringed their copyright, and trademark, created unfair competition, and is cybersquatting by using “Ryder Ripps Bored Ape Yacht Club” (RRBAYC). The product launched by Ryder Ripps is meant to be satirical and is a parody of the NFT collection trend. Yuga claimed that they are facing actual and monetary harm due to the said replica. Ryder commented on the issue on Twitter stating that the case would be monumental in defining the nature of an NFT as NFTs cannot actually be copied.
The new UK Law welcomes Text Data Mining of copyrighted material
Text Data Mining (TDM) is considered to be vital for Artificial Intelligence learning. Previously, this tool would have resulted in unintended copyright violation, however, with this new amendment to the copyright law, TDM is allowed as an exception to copyright infringement. The legislators also considered awarding protection to AI-authored works, but it was put under review and is intended to be released once the intricacies are finalized.
Kim Kardashian gets sued over her new brand “SKNN”
Beauty Concepts, a business owned by Cydnie Lunsford Michael Rhodes has precedence in using the word “SKNN+” from 2018 for the sale of their products in the skincare sector. The reality TV star Kim Kardashian recently launched her brand “SKNN” for her cosmetic product line. As a result, she was sued by Cydnie. Kim’s lawyers claim that attempts to settle the claim were made but to no avail. They further also alleged that Cydnie did not wish to negotiate on any terms but rather plainly demanded large sums of money to settle.
Delhi Tribunal sides with Hero MotoCorp, allows it to use “Hero” trademark
The Manjul family group split the Hero business for it to be led by two different family members. The “Hero” trademark was also divided among the two for the purpose of use. Hero MotoCorp and Hero Electric approached the court over using the trademark “Hero” for the sale of electric scooters. Hero Electric claimed that Hero MotoCorp has no right to use this trademark in the sector of electronic vehicles. However, the court allowed Hero MotoCorp to use the mark since it has intended such use since 2012 and had subsequently invested over 7000 crores for advertisement and development.
Hyderabad's Handicraft Article “Lac Bangles” Attempts to get a GI Tag
The Creasent Handicraft Artisans Welfare Association filed for a Geographical Indication Tag for Lac Bangles on 23rd June 2022. These bangles contribute greatly to the tourist economy of Hyderabad as visitors rush to local market places such as the Laal Bazaar to purchase them. The specialty of these bangles is the unique design placement and use of precious stones over the bangle base. The application is pending so far and is yet to be examined by the Registry. Hyderabad has previously managed to get the GI Tag for Hyderabad Haleem. This would be the second GI tag for Hyderabad if the application is successful.
Patent Infringement Suit Ensues Over COVID-19 Antiviral Drug
Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. has initiated a patent infringement suit against Pfizer, Inc over the drug Paxlovid. Enanta claimed that the antiviral drug infringes their US patent having application number 11,358,953. They have clarified that they understand the need for the drug in the market and will seek no injunctive relief. It was also mentioned that in no way will the sale, production, or distribution of the drug will be impeded, but instead, they seek to obtain fair compensation for the sale made by Pfizer so far.