Zhejiang Higher People's Court issued a second instance
judgment, ruling that Philips' manufacture and sale of safety
outlets did not constitute patent infringement.
On 31 October 2001, a patent was granted in respect of a safety
outlet invented by Ao Qianping, Vice-General Manager of Ningbo City
Saleisi Electric Co., LTD (Saleisi). In August 2005, Ao Qianping
licensed Shenzhen D&S Industries
Limited（D&S）to use the invention. Since
2009, Philips (China) has appointed D&S its agent to
manufacture and sell various Philips products. Last July, Ao
Qianping found that three types of PHILIPS branded safety outlets
infringed his patent. At the end of this year, he filed a lawsuit
at Ningbo Intermediate People's Court, claiming damages of
800,000 Yuan damages (approx. US$127.000)
Ningbo Intermediate People's Court held that the trade mark,
enterprise' name and bar code indicated on the disputed
products showed that Philips was the manufacturer, D&S having
manufactured the products after receiving Philips'
authorization. Philips did not, however, obtain Ao Qianping's
permission and manufactured the infringing products through
D&S, thereby infringing upon Ao Qianping's patent right.
D&S's acts of instructing its subsidiary to produce the
disputed products under the PHILIPS brand also constituted
infringement. The court ruled that the Defendants, Philips and
D&S, should jointly pay the plaintiff 800,000 Yuan (approx.
US$127,000) in damages.
However, on appeal, the Zhejiang province Higher People's
Court, overruled that decision and held that Philips had not
infringed by entrusting Huizhou D&S to process the patented
products and later selling them directly to Shenzhen D&S for
Reportedly, Ao Qianping may apply to the SPC for a retrial.
This article enunciates the recent, much awaited, and landmark judgment delivered on September 16, 2016 by Hon'ble Delhi High Court throwing light on the important provisions of the Copyright Act, 1962.
Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion recently issued an office memorandum pursuant to receiving representations from various stakeholders for guidance with respect to the applicability of the provisions of Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957.
An Invention Disclosure Form is the documentation of the invention. This is a means to document particulars of your invention and submitting it to the patent attorney who is filing your patent application.
The Patents Act 1970, along with the Patents Rules 1972, came into force on 20th April 1972, replacing the Indian Patents and Designs Act 1911. The Patents Act was largely based on the recommendations of the Ayyangar Committee Report headed by Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar. One of the recommendations was the allowance of only process patents with regard to inventions relating to drugs, medicines, food and chemicals.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).