Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Trademark infringement. This document cover leading case laws and sections involved in trademark infringement.
Typology: Assignments
1 / 9
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
With recent advances in technology, as well as the ease of sharing, copying and storing information in the digital world, one of the biggest challenges that businesses face is the protection of their confidential business information. This information can include business strategies, proposals, client databases and information, compilations, designs, programmes, drawings, devices, formulae or compositions. Not all types of information qualify for protection under the patent and copyright laws; further, certain data arises out of a company’s day-to-day operations for which formal protection is not sought, but which remains valuable. Many businesses are finding it challenging to safeguard their crucial information, due to the various online and physical tools available to ease the transfer of data. The threat they face is not only external, but can also come from internal sources such as employees and contractors who have access to important business information. It is increasingly common for employees to switch jobs. When they do, they sometimes take confidential information with them or even set up competing businesses based on their previous employer’s stolen data, including technical information, business methods and strategies. Contractors sometimes infringe on drawings, designs, recipes and compositions that have been shared with them by a client(or produced under a client’s technical guidance), by offering the same or similar products at a cheaper price and under a different label^1. Information refers to know-how transmitted “orally, by letter or by demonstration”. The maintenance of secrecy is pertinent for securing to owner of an invention the uninterrupted proprietorship of marketable know-how so that it remains at least a form of property and it can be enforced by law. Confidential information can be defined as information that can be legally protected and provides a business advantage to the owner of that information by virtue of the fact that it is kept secret. The two underlying requirements are that the information must have value by virtue of being kept secret and it must be capable of being legally protected. The word confidential information and trade secrets are synonymous. It can also be defined as that type of information which is privileged information, classified information, or specific information of a type for which there is a clear and compelling need to withhold from disclosure. It was remarked in the case of Stephen John Coogan v News Group Newspapers Limited and Glenn Michael Mulcaire (^1) John Richard Brady V Chemical Process Equipment AIR 1987 Del 372, 381
avowed common object in mind, such as a joint venture or the manufacture of articles by one party for the other, then the recipient would carry a heavy burden if it seeks to repel a contention that he was bound by an obligation of confidence. It must be emphasised that the question of a breach of confidence will arise only in respect of information that is indeed confidential and not otherwise. As observed by Lord Greene, it is perfectly possible to have a confidential document be it a formula, a plan, a sketch, or something of that kind, which is the result of work done by the maker basis materials which may be available for the use of anybody; but what makes it confidential is the fact that the maker of the document has used his brain and thus produced a result which can only be produced by somebody who goes through the same process. The rule of equity in a suit for breach of confidence is rooted in the principle that when a party in confidence discloses information that it has produced with its valuable resources, to another party, such other party should not be allowed to take undue advantage of it. Allowing the same, would result in someone else being given a free pass to misuse and take advantage of someone else's hard work and labour. It may also be noted that the common law duty of confidence is a right in persona against an individual who has come across such information under confidence, and is distinct from a propriety right in such information itself, opposable in rem.
Indian courts have largely followed the rule of equity that a person receiving confidential information in confidence cannot take unfair advantage, even in the absence of a contract. The decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of John Richard Brady v. Chemical Process Equipments Private Limited^4 ("Brady Case") is perhaps one of the first cases that discusses the principles of confidentiality obligations in the absence of a contract. The Delhi High Court followed the Saltman Engineering Case and held that "the law on this subject does not depend on any implied contract. It depends on the broad principles of equity that who has received information in confidence shall not take unfair advantage of it". The Delhi High Court found it to be in the interest of justice to restrain the defendants from abusing the know-how, specifications, drawings and other technical information regarding the plaintiff's machine "which was entrusted to them under express condition of strict confidentiality, which they have (^4) John Richard Brady v. Chemical Process Equipments Private Limited, AIR 1987 Delhi 372 (Delhi High Court).
apparently used as a 'spring-board' to jump into the business field to the detriment of the plaintiffs." Similar observations were made by the Karnataka High Court in the case of In Phase Power Technologies v. ABB India Limited^5 , wherein the following observations of Lord Greene were quoted: "If a defendant is proved to have used confidential information, directly or indirectly obtained from a plaintiff, without the consent, express or implied of the plaintiff, he will be guilty of an infringement of the plaintiff's rights."
In order to understand the infringement of copyright in a design, we need to know what constitutes a design to be qualified as statutorily registered design under the Designs Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). To that extent, section 4 of the Act lays down the following three criteria which are to be considered while a person or proprietor intends to get their work registered:
substantial similarities. It was an important case since the designs of both the parties were to be considered from the perspective of a child which was found out by the Court to having substantial differences as against the contentions which were made by the plaintiff^11. Contravention of any of the following checks mentioned above shall be discussed in the next chapter of this article which provides remedy as against the wrongdoer or the person who has infringed upon the rights of the person who has already registered their design as under the Act.
In pursuant to the previous chapter, we have established as to what constitutes an infringement of copyright in design and the different case laws which had further helped in developing the understanding of the concept. In this chapter, the different remedial mechanisms shall be explained below with reference to the relevant provisions^12 :
