India: Intellectual Property & Information Technology Laws (September 2012)

Last Updated: 8 January 2013

Article by Vijay Pal Dalmia, Advocate, Supreme Court of India and Delhi High Court, Partner & Head of Intellectual Property Laws Division, Vaish Associates Advocates, India

In This Issue

Latest IP Case law

PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL EXHAUSTION:

India does not follow!

  • Samsung Electronics Vs. Kapil Wadhwa

    Prior use of trademark has to be established by production of clear and cogent evidence!
  • Premier Tissues India Ltd. v. Rolia Tissues Industries and Anr.

    No objection certificate by company not having right cannot entitle Respondent to use trade mark and copyright.
  • Hahnemann Laboratory Ltd. & Ors. v. The Hahnemann India Laboratories (BN) & Ors.
  • Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd. v. Radico Khaitan Ltd.
  • Super Cassettes Industries Limited v. Mr. Chintamani Rao & Ors.

CAUTION!

Notarization outside India and Stamping of Power of Attorney in India is mandatory for Filing of Trademark, Patent and Design Applications in India, when power of attorney is executed outside India

Knowledge Update

  • The Copyright Amendment Bill, 2010 gets passed by both Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha!
  • The Trademark Registry comes out with a list of international non proprietary names.

INDIAN IP DECISIONS

India does not follow!

Samsung Electronics Vs. Kapil Wadhwa

http://lobis.nic.in/dhc/MAN/judgement/18-02- 2012/MAN17022012IA77742011.pdf

The Plaintiff (Samsung) filed a case against the defendants who were selling grey market printers of the plaintiff in the market and operating a website selling a varied range of genuine printers under the plaintiff's mark SAMSUNG at prices much lower than offered by the plaintiff. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were guilty of infringement & passing off the goods by way of parallel imports.

The single Judge granted an interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff restraining the defendants from importing, exporting, distributing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in the grey market ink cartridges/toners, or any other products of the plaintiff under the mark SAMSUNG or any mark as may be deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trademarks amounting to infringement of the plaintiff's registered trademarks.

The Defendants contended that they were importing and selling genuine SAMSUNG printers which had been purchased and imported through the legitimate channels thus disqualifying any infringement of the Plaintiff's products. Defendants claimed that the plaintiff failed to disclose that the Plaintiff was aware that the defendants were selling openly on its premises since 1998, parallel imported products that were not purchased from plaintiff.

The plaintiff was prima facie able to demonstrate a case of infringement of the registered trade mark under section 29(1) and (6) of the Trademarks Act, 1999.

The court held that "any importer who is not a registered proprietor or permissive right holder, if imports the goods under the mark which is identical or similar to a trademark in relation to the goods in respect of which the trademark is registered so as to render the use of the mark likely to be taken as a trademark, then the said act of importation amounts to infringement."

It was further held that Section 29(1) does not distinguish between persons either importing genuine goods or non genuine goods for the purposes of attracting the provisions of infringement.

The contention raised by the defendants that India follows the principle of international exhaustion was wrong as the court held that there is no mention of international market or international exhaustion in Section 30(3) & (4) or anywhere in the Trademarks Act,1999.

Once goods are acquired by a person from the registered proprietor within the same market, the registered proprietor cannot claim that there is an infringement of his trademark on the count that there is change of ownership by way of an assignment between the registered proprietor and some other person. However, this will not apply in favour of a person acquiring goods from a foreign market since the court's interpretation of the words "in the market" in sub section 30(3) is that it refers only to the domestic market.

Prior use of trademark has to be established by production of clear and cogent evidence!

Premier Tissues India Ltd. vs. Rolia Tissues Industries and Anr.1 2012 (50) PTC 206(DEL.)

PREMIER Vs. PREMIUM for tissue paper products was held to be deceptively similar in the above mentioned, leading to an ad interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff manufactures tissues under the registered trademark PREMIER and sold its products in boxes/cartons with peculiar artwork and design, over which it claimed to have copyright. The Defendant started manufacturing and selling tissues under the registered trademark of PREMIUM in the packing distinctly similar to that of the plaintiff's packing. The plaintiff filed the suit against the defendant for infringement of trademark and copyright, and passing off. The defendant by way of a counter-suit against the plaintiff claimed that the plaintiff infringed the Defendant's trademark PREMIUM as well as the copyright of the artistic work of its packing.

The court while passing the interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiff observed that since the Defendants claimed prior user of the trademark and the copyright in the artwork of the packing seeking the interim injunction against the Plaintiff, it became necessary for the Defendants to present clear and cogent evidence which could not be challenged at the prima facie stage. Inconsistent stand before the court and the trademark registry was also abhorred by the court. The court took the view that there was a prima facie case and balance of convenience in favour of the Plaintiff.

It has been held by the Court that solid evidence is the foundation of case for grant of interim injunction. The court held that both the marks PREMIER and PREMIUM are deceptively similar, and the Defendants could not have designed their packaging without having placed the packaging of the Plaintiff side by side.

No objection certificate by company not having right cannot entitle Respondent to use trade mark and copyright!

Hahnemann Laboratory Ltd. & Ors. v. The Hahnemann India Laboratories (BN) & Ors.2

The petitioner owned the trademark Arnimax and had copyright over the artistic work in the trade dress. A dealership was given to the Respondents by the Petitioners. The Petitioners also issued a licence to one Das Homeo Laboratories to market some of the petitioner's products. The Respondents used the trade mark Arnimax coupled with the trade dress for its products, by relying on a No Objection Certificate issued by Das Homeo. The petitioners filed civil suit against the respondents and obtained interim order against the Respondents restraining them from using the trademark. The Petitioner also contended that Das Laboratories were only given licence to market the petitioner's products, but no right over the label, and as such they had no right to issue the No Objection Certificate.

The Court accepted the Petitioner's contentions and stated that the trademark label and copyright over the trade dress vested with the petitioner and the licensee had no right to issue the No Objection Certificate to the Respondents. Therefore, the use of such label and trade dress was held to be an infringement of the vested right of the Petitioner.

8 PM Vs. 8

Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant / Defendant) vs. Radico Khaitan Ltd.3,4 (Plaintiff/ Respondent)

Radico (Respondents/Plaintiffs) are whiskey manufacturers and registered owners of the trademark "8 PM" and contended that the numeral "8" is an essential, distinguishable and identifying feature of its mark in relation to the font size and colour with which the numeral is printed.

Radico's grievance pertained to the Carlsberg's (Appellant / Defendant) sale of products under the trademark " ", with the numeral printed in the same font, size and colour and styling as that of Radico. Radico filed a suit against Carlsberg and Carlsberg contended that the use of the numeral "8" was a descriptive use and it was used in such capacity by other alcohol manufacturers also in common trade practice. Carlsberg also contended that Radico has trademark rights over the label "8 PM" and not over the numerical "8".

The learned Single Judge accepted the contentions of Carlsberg stating that trademark cannot be awarded for a single numeral, and that the use of the numeral "8" by the Carlsberg is in a descriptive sense, as is used by other alcohol manufacturers in common trade practice. However, the court awarded limited injunction against Carlsberg from using the numeral "8" in the same style, font and design as that of Radico, which resulted in an appeal against the decision of the learned Single Judge.

The Appellate court held that the limited Injunction granted by the learned Single Judge to "avoid any bleak chances of misrepresentation" is not sound since the injunction was not granted for an action for infringement of registered trademark or an action for passing off.

The Appellate court held that Radico has a registered trade mark for "8 PM" as a composite mark and cannot claim exclusivity over the single numeral "8", as there was a difference between using the numeral in its descriptive sense and as a trademark. It was held that the numeral "8" was not used in its descriptive sense since it did not indicate any quality, functionality, property, content etc. of the product itself. It was the most prominent component of the label and the consumers are most likely to identify the product with the label "8". It was further held by the Court that the unique elements of Radico's label had not been copied by Carlsberg and there was prima facie no likelihood of consumer confusion, simply because the style of writing the numeral "8" was similar. Therefore, order passed by the learned single judge was set aside and this injunction was vacated.

COPYRIGHT

Super Cassettes Industries Limited v. Mr. Chintamani Rao & Ors.5

The two plaintiffs in the suit, namely, Super Cassettes Industries Limited and Yash Raj Films, own copyright in cinematographic films and sound recordings in a large number of literary, musical and cinematographic works of T-Series and Yash Raj Films, respectively. The Plaintiffs filed the suit against the Defendants for permanent injunction to restrain them from engaging in public performance, reproduction, recording, distributing etc. of any works over which the plaintiffs have copyright.

The plaintiffs contended that the Defendants being a news channel named India TV, have used video recordings and sound recordings of cinematographic films and musical works over which they have copyright, during the telecast of their programmes and a substantial portion of these works has been directly lifted by the Defendants, without obtaining licence for the same. They also contended that in some cases the use of video clippings or sound recordings did not serve any purpose in the airing of the program.

The Defendants not denying the usage of portions of such cinematographic and musical works, contended that the said acts were protected by S. 52 of the Copyright Act, and amounted to fair dealing and fair comment for the purpose of fair criticism and review. Moreover, only a small portion of the works was used in a completely different context to denote instances from the life of the singer/performer. Defendants also contended that lifting such small portion did not affect the business of the plaintiffs. And the denial of telecast of these works by India TV amounts to infringing their right under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution. They also stated that the said works being derivative automatically do not fall within the ambit of S. 52 (1).

The Court held that just because the works in question were derivative, their exclusion from S. 52 (1) did not cause any confusion in the interpretation of the section, and that the section refers to use of works rather than the nature of the works in question. Also, the denial of usage by the plaintiffs without permission did not constitute any infringement of the fundamental right under Art. 19(1)(a). Freedom of speech and expression does not confer a right to infringe another's right under the Copyright Act. Also since the plaintiffs had expressed their desire to grant the defendants the license, the contention of the defendants that the terms of granting license by the plaintiff are onerous and tantamount to not granting a license, was automatically rejected. If such was the case, they should have filed an application in the Copyright Board under S. 31.

The Court also held that the usage of the video recordings and clippings in the news programs did not amount to a review or fair criticism, and therefore their use without the plaintiff's permission was held illegal. Therefore, the contentions of the defendant that their actions amount to fair use under S. 52 (1) were not sustained. The court subsequently ordered the payment of costs by the defendant towards the plaintiff.

BIRD'S EYE VIEW

In this section, we give you a Bird's Eye View of the cases relating to trademarks in which Indian Courts have granted injunction or refused to grant injunction.

                            INJUNCTION GRANTED

Trademark

Vs.

Infringing Trademark

Product

ORZID6

Vs.

FORZID

Medicine

Southindies7

Vs.

South Thindies

Restaurant

BISER8

Vs.

DISER

Medicine

TATA9

Vs.

TATA

Batteries

FROOTI10

Vs.

FRUITI

Beverages

Indiatimes.com11

Vs.

myindiatime.com

Domain Name

MALOXINE12

Vs.

MALOXINE EXPHAR

Medicine

HERITAGE13

Vs.

INDIAN HERITAGE

Rice

HERITAGE14

Vs.

INDIAN HERITAGE SELECT

Rice

TRIMOL15

Vs.

TRIMOLGIN

Medicine

TRIMOLE16

Vs.

TRIMOLGIN

Medicine

MARVEL17

Vs.

MARVEL TOUCH

Tea, spices

CAUTION!

Notarization and Stamping of Power of Attorney in India for Filing of Trademark, Patent and Design Applications in India

A lot of foreign applications for grant of patent, registration of designs and trademarks are being filed by the applicants and attorneys across India without following the due process of law relating to notarization and stamping of power of attorneys, which may jeopardize the applications leading to invalidation of grants and registrations etc.

NOTARIZATION REQUIREMENT:

18Under the Indian laws, any power of attorney executed outside India needs authentication by notarization and stamping by the Collector of Stamps. Under the Indian laws, any power of attorney executed outside India needs authentication. It is a requirement that a power of attorney has to be executed in the presence of certain designated officers. So, any power of attorney executed outside India should be authenticated by a notary public of that country or the Indian consul.

Section 85 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 creates a presumption of authenticity in favour of a notarized power of attorney. It states as under

"Section 85 - Presumption as to power-of-attorney:

The Court shall presume that every document purporting to be a power-of-attorney, and to have been executed before, and authenticated by, a Notary Public, or any court, Judge, Magistrate, Indian Consul or Vice-Consul, or representative of the Central Government, was so executed and authenticated."

STAMPING REQUIREMENT as per Indian Stamp Act, 1899 19

Under Section 3(c) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, stamp duty is payable on every instrument (other than a bill of exchange or promissory note) mentioned in the Schedule, which is executed out of India relates to any matter or thing done or to be done in India and is received in India.

"Power of Attorney", being an instrument falls under Article 48 of Schedule I of the Stamp Act. Therefore, the power of attorney, though executed outside India, is sought to be used in India, for filing a PCT national phase patent application, convention application, registration of trademark and designs are liable to stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act. This legal proposition is applicable on power of attorneys for all purposes.

In the case of Malaysian Airlines Systems BHD vs. M/s. Stic Travels (P) Ltd., the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India had held that:

"Power of attorney is liable to stamp duty for proceedings in India under Indian Stamp Act, though executed outside India"

Further Section 18 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 read with Rule 12 of the Indian Stamp Rules, 1925 provides that every instrument chargeable with duty executed only out of India may be stamped within three months after it has been first received in India.

Further, where any such instrument cannot, with reference to the description of stamp prescribed therefore, be duly stamped by a private person, it may be taken within the said period of three months to the Collector, who shall stamp the same, in such manner as the State Government may by rule prescribe, with a stamp of such value as the person so taking such instrument may require and pay for. It is pertinent to note that different states in India have different rates of applicable stamp duties.

It is further important to note that even if the Indian Patent and Trade Mark Office is accepting power of attorney on a plain paper, such legal infirmity may be fatal to the applications, which have been prosecuted on the basis of power of attorney, without any notarization or stamping. Due process of law is required to be followed to avoid unnecessary complications and threats to valuable IP rights.

KNOWLEDGE UPDATE

COPYRIGHT

The Copyright (Amendment) Act, 201220 comes into effect w.e.f. 8th June, 2012

A new era of extended rights have begun for Artists under the amended copyright Act 21, by the notification of the amendments to the Act. Lobbyists have been pushing for an amendment in the copyright laws to give music directors and lyricists a share of the profits earned on their work.

The amended Act declares authors as owners of the copyright, which cannot be assigned to producers as was the practice till now.

There are seven broad areas that are reflected in the amended Act. These include right of

  • author and music composer,
  • visually impaired,
  • extending compulsory regime to unpublished work, and imposition of punitive actions among others.

TRADEMARK

The Trademark Registry comes out with a list of International Non Proprietary Names.22

The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (CGPDTM) has finally published a list of International Non- Proprietary Names (INNs) as declared by the World Health Organization (WHO). Hopefully, this publication will be followed up by an official notification, following which Trade Marks Examiners will be mandated to examine pharmaceutical trademarks for any similarities to the INNs published in the list. Any names which are identical to those on the INN list will not be registered as a pharmaceutical trademark.

INNs are particularly relevant in the field of pharmaceutical trademarks. In most instances INNs refer to the generic name of a pharmaceutical drug. However INNs can also refer to the common 'functional group' or 'active ingredient' of a particular class of pharmaceutical drugs.

Section 13 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 prohibits the registration of names of chemical elements or INNs which have been declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) and notified by the Registrar of Trade Marks.

The list of INNs can be accessed from the following link: http://ipindia.nic.in/list_INN_08February2012.pdf

Footnotes

1 http://lobis.nic.in/dhc/MAN/judgement/23-02- 2012/MAN22022012IA108462011.pdf

2 http://indiankanoon.org/doc/166124964/

3 http://delhicourts.nic.in/SEP11/RADICO%20KHAITAN%20LIMITED% 20VS%20CARLSBERG%20INDIA.pdf

4.http://indiankanoon.org/doc/49386818/

5 http://delhicourts.nic.in/nov11/Super%20Cassettes%20 Industries%20Limited%20Vs.%20Chintamani%20Rao.pdf

6 2012 (50) PTC 433 (Del.)(DB)

7 2012 (50) PTC 493 (Karn.)

8 2012(50)PTC 501(Del.)

9 2012(50)PTC 528 (Bom.)

10 2012(51)PTC 133 (Del.)

11 2012(51)PTC 195 (Del.)

12 2012 (51) PTC 210 (Del.)

13 2012(50)PTC 27 (Del.)

14 2012(50)PTC 27 (Del.)

15 2012(50)PTC 112 (Bom.)

16 2012(50)PTC 112 (Bom.)

17 2012(49)PTC 82 (Del.)

18 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notary_public

19.http://finmin.nic.in/law/Stamp%20Act%201899.pdf

20 http://copyright.gov.in/Documents/CRACT_AMNDMNT_ 2012.pdf

21.http://copyright.gov.in/Documents/CopyrightRules1957.pdf

22 http://ipindia.nic.in/list_INN_08February2012.pdf.

© 2012, Vaish Associates, Advocates,
All rights reserved with Vaish Associates, Advocates, 10, Hailey Road, Flat No. 5-7, New Delhi-110001, India.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist professional advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. The views expressed in this article are solely of the authors of this article.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

 
In association with
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
Accounting and Audit
Anti-trust/Competition Law
Consumer Protection
Corporate/Commercial Law
Criminal Law
Employment and HR
Energy and Natural Resources
Environment
Family and Matrimonial
Finance and Banking
Food, Drugs, Healthcare, Life Sciences
Government, Public Sector
Immigration
Insolvency/Bankruptcy, Re-structuring
Insurance
Intellectual Property
International Law
Law Practice Management
Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Media, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Privacy
Real Estate and Construction
Strategy
Tax
Transport
Wealth Management
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.