On a personal note, I
can safely say that the Court’s findings on the interplay between (a) the
jurisdictions of a civil court seized of a suit for patent infringement, (b) the
Controller of Patents under the compulsory licensing mechanism (Section 84 of
the Patents Act) and (c) the Competition Commission of India, resonate with my
analysis in several
posts
in this
blog, which were subsequently discussed
by the Centre for Internet and Society. In fact, I had undertaken a comprehensive
analysis of the statutory allocation of responsibilities between civil courts, Controller
of patents and Competition Commission in my paper “Patents and Competition Law: Identifying Jurisdictional Metes and
Bounds in the Indian Context” which was submitted last year for publication
in the National Law School of India Review (NLSIR) and will hopefully be
published in the next few days. This paper is based on my talk delivered last
May in the 8th National Symposium on Competition Law at the National
Law School, Bangalore.
can safely say that the Court’s findings on the interplay between (a) the
jurisdictions of a civil court seized of a suit for patent infringement, (b) the
Controller of Patents under the compulsory licensing mechanism (Section 84 of
the Patents Act) and (c) the Competition Commission of India, resonate with my
analysis in several
posts
in this
blog, which were subsequently discussed
by the Centre for Internet and Society. In fact, I had undertaken a comprehensive
analysis of the statutory allocation of responsibilities between civil courts, Controller
of patents and Competition Commission in my paper “Patents and Competition Law: Identifying Jurisdictional Metes and
Bounds in the Indian Context” which was submitted last year for publication
in the National Law School of India Review (NLSIR) and will hopefully be
published in the next few days. This paper is based on my talk delivered last
May in the 8th National Symposium on Competition Law at the National
Law School, Bangalore.