IPR MCQ 2

Question 1

which act covers ID

Answer 1

ID is governed by the Designs Act, 2000

Question 2

first law covering ID

Answer 2

First law- Patents and Designs Protection Act, 1872

Question 3

Black Law’s Dictionary def of infringement

Answer 3

“act that interferes with one of
the exclusive eights of a patent, copyright and TM owner”

Question 4

when is TM infringed?

Answer 4

if he uses such
registered TM as his trade name

Question 5

industrial design

Answer 5

aesthetic value/appeal to the eye

Question 6

black laws dictionary def

Answer 6

“act that interferes with one of the exclusive eights of a patent, copyright and TM owner”

Question 7

when is TM infringed

Answer 7

1. whole copy with few alterations
2. used in the course of trade
3. oral use is ok
4. TM is printed
5. resembles so is likely to decieve

Question 8

section 29(1)

Answer 8

Not proprietor
Using the course of trade
Similar or identical goods
Likely to be seen as ™

Question 9

section 29(2)

Answer 9

Identical mark + similar goods
Similar mark + identical/similar goods
Identical mark + identical goods

Question 10

section 29(3)

Answer 10

identical goods + identical TM - presumption of decieving the public

Question 11

section 29(4)

Answer 11

well known trademark
identical TM in dissimilar goods will also infringe

Question 12

section 29(5)

Answer 12

cant use same TM as business name for the same service or goods

Question 13

section 29(6)

Answer 13

acts that constitute as infringement
1. selling, stockpiling etc.
2. use on packaging
3. advertiesment or paper
4. importing or exporting

Question 14

section 29(7)

Answer 14

If the packaging work or labelling was outsourced by X (owner of good) to Y (packager etc.), then Y is liable. X can also be liable if he could have found out about the infringement by some basic due diligence. For example, if the mark is well-known in the market of those goods, then X would be expected to know. All depends on factual matrix.

Question 15

section 29(8)

Answer 15

infringement thru advertiesment
1. misleads customers
2. detrimental to the distinctive character
3. against the reputation of the brand

Question 16

Who can sue for infringement?

Answer 16

proprieter user, heirs, foreign owners.

Question 17

Who can be sued?

Answer 17

Infringer
Agents of infringer
Directors and promoters of limited company cannot be joined unless personally liable

Question 18

the doctrine of dilution is found in S.

Answer 18

29(4) of the 1999 Act.

Question 19

defenses

Answer 19

Defenses
Plaintiff has no title to sue
Use falls under Exceptions under Section 30- lists out acts which do not constitute infringement
Concurrent registration
Honest concurrent user
Attack validity of registration of plaintiff. Commonly used for or industrial design
Plaintiff debarred from suing- delay. Latches

Question 20

Relaxo Rubber Ltd. v. Aman Cable Industries

Question 21

M/S Castrol Limited and Anr v. Iqbal Singh Chawla and anr. (Castrol case)

Question 22

orgin of dilution law

Answer 22

The doctrine dates back to an article written by Frank I. Schechter which was published in Harvard Law Review.

Question 23

before the 1999 act Before this, the well-known trademarks were protected by _________

Answer 23

by bringing an action of passing off.

Question 24

it is the first decision where the Court used the words “to dilute” in the absence of S. 29 (4).

Answer 24

Daimler Benz Aktiegesellschaft v. Hybo Hindustan

Question 25

what is Id

Answer 25

shape, configuration, pattern, or ornament

Question 26

Section 2(a)

Answer 26

“article” means any article of manufacture and any substance, artificial, or partly artificial and partly natural and includes any part of an article capable of being made and sold separately;

Question 27

2 tests to determine novelty in ID

Answer 27

1. Test of influencing customer preference- Benchairs Ltd. v. Chair Centre Ld (1974) (RPC)(UK) 2. Test of noticeability- Ferrero and Caps A Application (1978) (UK) The feature of design to be protected must be noticeable in appearance, not upon using it. For instance, the Ferrero Rocher chocolate has layers but it’s not noticeable upon seeing it, only when eaten. So this wouldn’t qualify

Question 28

case for the Test of influencing customer preference-

Answer 28

Benchairs Ltd. v. Chair Centre Ld (1974) (RPC)(UK) case for the test of

Question 29

case for the Test of noticeability

Answer 29

Ferrero and Caps A Application (1978) (UK)

Question 30

prohibition of protection of certain designs

Answer 30

Not new or original or Disclosed to public in India or in any other country by publication in tangible form or by use in any other way prior to filing date or Is not significantly distinguishable from known designs or combination of known designs or Comprises/contains scandalous/obscene matters

Question 31

Cancellation of registration

Answer 31

that the design has been previously registered in India; or that it has been published in India or in any other country prior to the date of registration; or that the design is not a new or original design; or that the design is not registrable under this Act; or it is not a design as defined under clause (d) of section 2.

Question 32

ESSENTIALS FOR AN ACTION FOR INFRINGEMENT OF TRADEMARK:

Answer 32

● The plaintiff must be the registered owner of a trademark. ● The defendant must be using a mark deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s mark. ● The use must be in relation to the goods in respect of which the plaintiff’s mark is registered. ● The use by the defendant must not be accidental but in the course of trade

Question 33

Where can the suit be filed?

Answer 33

[Section 134 of the TM Act] * Not lower than District Court. * Delhi and Bombay High Court has original jurisdiction to take up cases under the TM Act.

Question 34

Original

Answer 34

[Section 2(g)] Originates from the author + old in design but new is also ok

Question 35

design time

Answer 35

Maximum 15 years

Question 36

cancellation of registration of TM

Answer 36

section 19

Question 37

piracy of regis design

Answer 37

section 22

Question 38

22. Piracy of registered design.—

Answer 38

1. sale 2. import export 3. publish

Question 39

Piracy of registered design. remedy

Answer 39

sec 22(2) - payment * Fine up to ₹25,000 per act (max ₹50,000 total).

Question 40

section 29(9)

Answer 40

Even spoken use = infringement if words are distinctive.

Question 41

* Key issues

Answer 41

Entitlement, registration, actual deception/confusion, interim relief.

Question 42

* Design def section

Answer 42

[S.2(d)]: Must be new, original, eye appealing.

Question 43

Exclusions from Design Protection

Answer 43

* Literary/artistic works, buildings, stamps, flags, common trade variations, etc. * Anything primarily functional, mechanical, obscene, or immoral.

Question 44

* Limitation for piracy sec 22

Answer 44

3 years

Question 45

* Section 15 of Copyright Act, 1957:

Answer 45

o If a design is capable of registration under the Designs Act and is used >50 times, copyright ceases.

Question 46

Invention & Designs Act passed year

Answer 46

1888

Question 47

Patents and Designs Act enacted

Answer 47

1911

Question 48

* Design def

Answer 48

Eye-appealing visual elements (shape, configuration, etc.) in 2D/3D, applied industrially.

Question 49

* Article

Answer 49

Any manufactured object, artificial/partly-natural, capable of separate sale.

Question 50

* Original

Answer 50

Originated from author; or old work applied to a new context.

Question 51

* Appeals for design lie with whom

Answer 51

lie with High Court.

Question 53

Design def

Answer 53

2(d)