Formats
| Format | |
|---|---|
| BibTeX | |
| MARCXML | |
| TextMARC | |
| MARC | |
| DublinCore | |
| EndNote | |
| NLM | |
| RefWorks | |
| RIS |
Items
Details
Title
Patent law in India / / M.B. Rao, Manjula Guru.
Published
Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands : Kluwer Law International ; Frederick, MD : Sold and distributed in North, Central, and South America by Aspen Publishers, [2010]
Copyright
©2010
Call Number
KNS1134 .R36 2010
Former Call Number
Ind 671 R18 2010
ISBN
9789041132604 (hardback : acid-free paper)
9041132600 (hardback : acid-free paper)
9041132600 (hardback : acid-free paper)
Description
xxiv, 414 pages ; 25 cm
System Control No.
(OCoLC)671469461
Bibliography, etc. Note
Includes bibliographic references (pages [395]-398) and index.
Record Appears in
Added Author
Table of Contents
About the Author
vii
Preface
ix
ch. 1
Introduction
1
1.1.
Competition between MNCs and Generic Companies
1
1.2.
Origin of TRIPS Agreement
2
1.3.
Brief History of Patent Law
3
1.4.
Chapterization of the Book
3
ch. 2
About Patents Generally
7
2.1.
Origin of Patent System
7
2.2.
What is Invention?
8
2.2.1.
Invention should be New, Useful
9
2.3.
Grant of Patent
9
2.3.1.
Justification for Grant of Patent
9
2.3.2.
Creations of Nature not Eligible for Patent
10
2.3.3.
Decision in Hotchkiss v. Greenwood
10
2.3.4.
Concept of Invention
11
2.3.5.
Skill of a Mechanic v. Inventor
11
2.4.
Discovery v. Invention
11
2.5.
Definition of Patent (in Indian Law)
12
2.5.1.
UK Law
12
2.5.2.
US Law
13
2.6.
Improvements v. Invention
13
2.7.
Non-obviousness
13
2.7.1.
Graham v. John Deere Co
14
2.8.
Industrial Application
15
2.9.
Usefulness
15
2.9.1.
Summing Up
15
2.10.
General Outline of Patents Act
15
2.10.1.
Basic Principles Common
16
2.10.2.
Grant of Patents and the Procedure Thereto
16
ch. 3
Patentable Subject Matter
19
3.1.
Exclusions from Patentability
19
3.2.
Invention
20
3.3.
Involves an Idea and to Carry it out
21
3.4.
Combination of Separate Parts
21
3.5.
Indian Law
22
3.6.
Invention: New Product
22
3.7.
Changes in UK Law
23
3.8.
Obviousness
24
3.9.
Anticipation
24
3.10.
Indian Law on Anticipation
24
3.11.
In Revocation Proceedings
25
3.12.
In Opposition to Grant Proceedings
25
3.13.
Exceptions to Patentability
26
3.13.1.
Discovery/Improvement/Natural Substance
26
3.13.1.1.
Patentable Application Consists of Patentable and Non-patentable Subject-Matter (Whole Elements Approach)
26
3.13.1.2.
Conception and Joint Ownership
26
3.13.1.3.
Employees' Inventions
28
3.13.1.4.
Biotechnology Patents
30
3.13.1.5.
Priority Date
31
3.13.1.6.
Patents for Second Use
31
3.13.1.7.
To continue with our Discussion on Discovery/Invention, Clauses (c) and (d) of Section 3 of the Indian Patent Act Exclude the Discoveries and Natural Substances from Patentability
32
3.13.1.8.
Technical Innovations
33
3.13.1.9.
Further Consideration of Clause (d) of Section 3 of the Indian Act
35
3.13.1.10.
Does It Involve Technical Contribution
36
3.13.1.11.
New Use of Known Property
37
3.13.1.12.
Mashelkar Report
39
3.13.1.13.
Basheer's Earlier Report
39
3.13.1.14.
Panel Report Review
39
3.13.1.15.
Novartis Challenge of the Amended Patent Act
40
3.13.1.16.
High Court's decision on the Novartis Challenge of the Amended Patent Act
41
3.13.1.17.
Final Report of the Panel
42
3.13.1.18.
Working of the Amended Law
43
3.13.1.19.
Litigation for Grant of Patents: Generics v. MNCs
45
3.13.2.
Inventions Contrary to Public Order/Ordre Public and Morality
46
3.13.3.
Method of Treatment (Medical and Animals)
48
3.13.3.1.
Discovery of New Medicine v. Application of Old Medicine
48
3.13.3.2.
Discovery of Novel Properties in a known Substance: Case Law
49
3.13.3.3.
Patents for Animal Varieties
50
3.13.3.4.
Patent for Life Forms: If Produced by Technology
51
3.13.4.
Plant Varieties
51
3.13.4.1.
Difference in US & EU Practice
52
3.13.4.2.
UPOV 1991
53
3.13.5.
Biological Process
54
3.13.5.1.
Whether Technical Intervention Involved
54
3.13.6.
Computer Programs
55
3.13.6.1.
Mental Acts or Technical Application Involved
56
3.13.6.2.
Trend in US Cases
57
3.13.6.3.
Critique of US Practice
58
3.13.6.4.
Decision in Diamond v. Diehr
58
3.13.6.5.
Criticism of Development of US Law
59
3.13.6.6.
Indian Position
60
3.13.6.7.
Topography of Integrated Circuits
60
3.13.6.8.
Comparative Analysis of the Term Ìnvention' and Approach to Patentability amongst Different Countries
61
3.14.
Summing Up
63
ch. 4
Criteria for Patent Ability
65
4.1.
Utility
65
4.1.1.
Useful as on the Date of Invention
66
4.1.2.
Commercial Success No Relevance
66
4.1.3.
Meaning of Utility
66
4.1.4.
Useful as a Result of Inventor's Discovery
67
4.1.5.
In Biotechnology
67
4.1.6.
Specific Benefit in the Current Form
68
4.1.7.
Practical Benefits
68
4.1.8.
Vague Broad Statement of Utility Not Enough
68
4.1.9.
Useful Purpose Requirement
69
4.1.10.
In European Union
69
4.2.
Novelty/Anticipation
70
4.2.1.
State of the Art
70
4.2.2.
Novelty on the Priority Date
70
4.2.3.
Not Covered by Prior Art
71
4.2.4.
Not Anticipated by Publication or Use
71
4.2.5.
In India
71
4.2.6.
Information Made Available to the Public - Published - and No Novelty
72
4.3.
Prior Publication
73
4.3.1.
Chemical Patents: Selection Patents
73
4.3.2.
To Revert to the Consideration of Novelty/Anticipation
75
4.3.3.
Change in UK Law
75
4.3.4.
Merrel Dow's Case
76
4.3.5.
Critic's View on the above Decision
77
4.3.6.
Principles Laid Down in the Above Case
77
4.3.7.
Evan's Medical Patent Case
77
4.3.8.
Conclusion
78
4.3.9.
To Anticipate, the Book Must Have Been Available to the Public
79
4.3.10.
American Law Analysed
79
4.3.11.
Novelty in New Discoveries of Old Products: First Medical Use
80
4.3.12.
Second and Subsequent Medical Uses: Format of Swiss Claim
80
4.3.13.
Swiss Claims
81
4.3.14.
Novelty/Publication/Anticipation
82
4.3.15.
Prior Publication/Non-obvious
83
4.3.16.
A Single Publication
83
4.3.17.
Enabling Disclosure
85
4.3.18.
Enabling/Sufficiency of Disclosure
85
4.3.18.1.
Ratio descindi of the Case
87
4.3.18.2.
Further Consideration of Decided Cases
87
4.3.18.3.
Conclusion
88
4.3.18.4.
Interrelation between Enablement, Disclosure and Best Method in Patent Claims and Specifications
89
4.3.18.5.
Requirements of a Patent Application Regarding Enablement, Disclosure, Etc
89
4.3.18.6.
̀Best Mode' Explained
91
4.3.19.
Novelty/Disclosure/Anticipation
91
4.3.20.
Novelty/Non-obviousness: US Law
92
4.3.21.
In UK/EPC
93
4.3.22.
Sections 101, 102 and 103 of the US Act Considered
93
4.3.23.
Application to Be Filed in Time
93
4.3.24.
Invention: Cost Benefit
95
4.3.25.
Considerations to be Taken into Account
95
Non-obvious/Obvious
96
4.4.1.
Non-obvious Subject-Matter
96
4.4.1.1.
On What Amounts to Obviousness
98
4.4.2.
Obviousness
98
4.4.3.
Section 25/Section 64 of the Indian Act
99
4.4.4.
Tripartite Test
99
4.4.5.
What is Relevant Prior Art
100
4.4.6.
Courts Consideration
101
4.4.6.1.
Conclusion
102
4.4.6.2.
Section 103 of the US Code
102
4.4.7.
Novelty/Obviousness
102
4.4.8.
The Test of Obviousness
103
4.4.9.
Difference in Approach in UK and EPC Offices
103
4.4.10.
State of the Art (In UK)
104
4.4.10.1.
In Australia
105
4.4.10.2.
In US
105
4.4.10.3.
Conclusion
106
4.4.11.
Chemical and Biotechnological Inventions
108
4.4.11.1.
In India
109
4.4.12.
Analysis of Cases on Obviousness
109
4.4.13.
Person Skilled in the Art
110
4.4.14.
Determination of the Ordinary Skill in the Art
111
4.4.14.1.
Knowledge of the Skilled Person
111
4.4.15.
Obviousness/Non-obviousness
112
4.4.15.1.
Test for Obviousness
113
4.4.15.2.
Conclusion on Windsurfing Case
114
4.4.15.3.
Problem and Solution Approach
114
4.4.15.4.
Evidence to be Considered
115
4.4.16.
Claim to Commercial Success
115
4.4.17.
Role of Experts in Concluding Obviousness
115
4.4.18.
Common General Knowledge
116
Test of Hindsight
116
4.5.1.
Conclusion
117
4.5.2.
Improvements
117
4.6.
Combination Patents
118
4.7.
Known and Used Earlier
120
4.8.
Priority Date
121
4.8.1.
Information Made Available on Priority Date
122
4.9.
Foreign Patent
122
4.9.1.
Grounds of Opposition
123
4.10.
Broad Claims/Scope of Claims
123
4.10.1.
Conclusion
125
4.10.2.
Broad/Narrow Claims
126
4.10.3.
Evolution of Patent Claims
126
4.10.4.
Claim Drafting
127
ch. 5
Applications for Patent/Specification and Amendments Thereto
129
5.1.
Contents of Application: Specification
129
5.1.1.
Specification
129
5.1.2.
Contents of the Specification
130
5.1.2.1.
Provisional and Complete Specification
130
5.1.3.
Insufficient Disclosure of the Invention
130
5.1.4.
Written Description of the Invention
131
5.1.5.
Scope of Section 9 of the Indian Act
131
5.1.6.
Scope of Section 10
131
5.1.6.1.
Provisions of UK/EPC
132
5.1.7.
Construction of Specification vis-a-vis Claims
132
5.1.7.1.
US Law
133
5.1.8.
Person Skilled in the Art
133
5.1.9.
Matter Disclosed
135
5.1.10.
Extent of Disclosure
135
5.1.11.
Claims: To be Concise, Descriptive and Based on Information Disclosed
136
5.1.11.1.
Application to Contain Sufficient Information on Claims
137
5.1.12.
Construction of Claims
138
5.2.
Pith and Marrow
139
5.3.
Best Method
141
5.4.
Claims to Be Supported by the Description
141
5.4.1.
Correlation between Invention and Claim
142
5.4.2.
Claims v. Principles
142
5.4.3.
We have Earlier Noticed that Sub-Section 5 of Section 10 of the Indian Act Requires that the Claims - Shall be Fairly Based on the Matter Disclosed in the Specification
143
5.4.4.
English and Indian Laws Compared
144
5.4.4.1.
Summing Up
144
5.5.
Construction of the Specification
145
5.5.1.
Case Law
145
5.5.2.
Sections 10(4), 25(I)(g) and 64(I)(h) of the Indian Act Compared
147
5.5.3.
Sufficiency of Disclosure
147
5.5.4.
The Requirements of the Skilled Person
149
5.5.5.
Provisional: Complete Filing
150
5.5.6.
US Practice
150
5.6.
Amendment of Applications and Specifications
151
5.6.1.
Scope of Amendment to the Application before the Controller
151
5.6.2.
Interrelation with Sections 15 to 19
152
5.6.3.
Scope of Amendment
152
5.6.4.
Summing up of the above Provisions
154
5.6.5.
Publication and Examination of the Application
155
5.6.6.
Priority Date
155
5.6.7.
UK Law
156
5.6.8.
̀Disclaimer', ̀Correction' or Èxplanation'
156
5.6.8.1.
Case Law
157
5.6.9.
Correction
157
5.6.10.
Explanation
157
5.6.10.1.
What Can Be Allowed as Èxplanation'
158
5.6.11.
Section 59(1)
158
ch. 6
Patent Office: Register of Patents
161
6.1.
Controller of Patents and Appeals under the Act
161
6.1.1.
Who Can Apply for Patent
161
6.1.2.
Employee's Application
162
6.1.3.
Master and Servant
162
6.1.3.1.
Duty for Which he is Employed
162
6.1.4.
Contribution of Employee: Is it Inventive?
162
6.1.5.
Is it in the Course of Employee's employment
163
6.1.6.
UK Law
163
6.2.
Nature and Scope of Employment
164
6.3.
Examination of the Application in the Patent Office/Provisions in the Patent Act
164
6.3.1.
Examination of Patent Application
165
6.3.2.
More than One Invention
166
6.3.3.
Priority Date
166
6.3.4.
Substitution of Patent Application
167
6.3.5.
Time Set for Completion
167
6.4.
Register of Patents
168
6.4.1.
No Notice of Trust
168
6.4.2.
Assignment of Patent
168
6.4.3.
Licenses of Patent
168
6.5.
Power of Appellate Board to Rectify the Register
169
6.5.1.
Time for Rectification
169
6.5.2.
Register Open to Public
169
6.6.
Controller of Patents
169
6.6.1.
Patent Offices
170
6.6.2.
Powers of the Controller
170
6.6.3.
Decision of Controller
172
6.6.4.
Discretionary Powers
172
6.7.
Appeals under the Act
173
6.7.1.
Technical Member
173
6.7.2.
Appeals
173
6.8.
Appellate Board
173
6.8.1.
Section 117
174
ch. 7
Opposition Proceedings/Revocation of Patents/Surrender of Patents
175
7.1.
Opposition to Grant of Patent/Revocation of a Patent on Petition
175
7.1.1.
Sections 25 and 64
175
7.1.2.
Examination of the Framework of the above Sections
176
7.1.3.
Detailed Examination of the above Sections
176
7.1.3.1.
Summing Up
180
7.1.4.
Interpretation of Section 25/Section 64 (i.e., in Opposition Proceedings/Revocation Proceedings)
181
7.1.4.1.
Opposition Proceedings
181
7.1.4.2.
Revocation Proceedings
182
7.2.
Surrender and Revocation of Patents
184
7.2.1.
Section 63
184
7.2.2.
Section 65
184
7.2.3.
Section 66
185
ch. 8
Patents of Addition: Restoration of Lapsed Patents
187
8.1.
When a Patent of Addition Can Be Granted
187
8.1.1.
Inventive Step
187
8.2.
Patent of Addition
188
8.2.1.
Period of Grant
188
8.3.
Restoration of Lapsed Patents
189
8.3.1.
Procedure for Disposal of Applications
189
8.3.2.
Rights of Patentee
190
ch. 9
Patent Rights and Infringement
191
9.1.
Rights of Patentee
191
9.2.
What Constitutes ̀Making' for Infringement
192
9.2.1.
Repair v. Making
192
9.3.
Extra-Territoriality
193
9.3.1.
DeepSouth Packaging Co. Case
193
9.3.2.
Amendment to US Law
193
9.4.
Combination Patents
194
9.4.1.
Magna Graphics Case
194
9.5.
Permissible Repairs
195
9.5.1.
Repairs v. Reconstruction
195
9.5.2.
Indian Law
196
9.6.
Import
197
9.6.1.
Gramophone Company Case
197
9.7.
Evaluation of Patentee's Right
198
9.8.
Doctrine of Exhaustion
198
9.8.1.
Exhaustion v. Parallel Trade
199
9.8.2.
US Law
199
9.8.3.
TRIPS Agreement
200
9.8.4.
Position in EU
200
9.9.
Keep
201
9.9.1.
Decision in McDonald v. Graham
201
9.10.
Patents for a Process
201
9.11.
Protection for Biotechnological Inventions: EU Directive
202
9.12.
The Right to Dispose of the Product
203
9.13.
Sections 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 140 and 141 of the Indian Patent Act (Powers of Patentee under the Indian Law)
203
9.14.
Assignment of Rights
203
9.14.1.
Rights of Co-owners of Patent
204
9.14.2.
Restrictive Conditions on Sale or License
204
9.15.
Transfer of Patent Rights
204
9.16.
Compulsory Licensing
205
9.17.
Experimental Use and R&D
205
9.17.1.
Amendment to US Law to Permit R&D, etc
206
9.18.
Infringement
207
9.19.
Direct Infringement/Contributory Infringement
207
9.20.
Literal Infringement
208
9.21.
Interpreting Claims Language
208
9.21.1.
Summing Up
209
9.21.2.
Is The Claim Language Clear
210
9.22.
Function of the Claims
210
9.23.
Purposive Construction
211
9.23.1.
Summing Up Courts Interpretation
212
9.24.
Interpretation by UK Courts: Interpreting Purposely
212
9.25.
Decisions
212
9.25.1.
In Catnic v. Hill
212
9.25.2.
In Smith Kline & French v. Harbottle
213
9.26.
Doctrine of Equivalents
214
9.26.1.
Rationale behind the Doctrine
215
9.26.2.
Considerations to be Taken into Account
216
9.27.
The All Elements Rule
217
9.28.
Doctrine of Prosecution History Estoppel
217
9.28.1.
Summing Up
218
9.29.
Prior Art
218
9.30.
The Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents
219
9.30.1.
Prosecution History Estoppel
219
9.31.
Further Consideration of Doctrine of Prosecution History Estoppel and Doctrine of Equivalents
220
9.31.1.
Festo Corp'n Case
220
9.32.
Pith and Marrow Doctrine
222
9.32.1.
Case Law
222
9.33.
Action for Infringement of Patent
223
9.34.
Remedies for Infringement
224
9.34.1.
Court's Function in Judging Infringement
224
9.35.
Grant of Interim Injunction
225
9.35.1.
Conclusion
225
9.36.
Burden of Proof
226
9.37.
Declaration as to Non-infringement
226
9.38.
Defences
227
9.38.1.
Patent Misuse
227
9.39.
Conditions in Restraint of Trade
227
9.39.1.
Lack of Novelty
227
9.40.
Patent Misuse - Scope of
228
9.40.1.
American Law
229
9.40.2.
Amendment to Section 271(d) of the US Act
230
9.40.3.
Summing Up
230
9.41.
Inequitable Conduct of the Patentee
230
9.42.
Prior Use
231
9.43.
Reliefs
231
9.43.1.
Indian Law
231
9.44.
Grant of injunction (temporary or permanent)
232
9.44.1.
Grant of Interim Injunction
233
9.44.2.
Final Injunction
233
9.45.
Relief by Way of Damages and Account of Profits
234
9.45.1.
By way of Damages
234
9.45.2.
By Way of Account of Profits
235
ch. 10
International Arrangements
237
10.1.
Applications under PCT
237
10.2.
In India
238
10.2.1.
Indian Law on PCT
238
10.3.
In UK
239
10.4.
In E.P.C.
240
ch. 11
Compulsory Licensing of Patents
243
11.1.
Indian Law
243
11.1.1.
Grounds for Compulsory License
243
11.1.2.
Grounds for the Controller to Issue Compulsory License
244
11.1.3.
Reasonable Requirements of the Public: Conditions for Grant of License
244
11.2.
Deprivation of Patentee's Rights in Certain Cases
245
11.3.
Licensing of Related Patents
246
11.4.
Calculation of License Fees
246
11.5.
Licensing of Patents to Work Related Products
247
11.5.1.
Grant of Compulsory License
247
11.6.
Compulsory Licensing under Orders Notification issued by Central Government
247
11.7.
The Doha Declaration
248
11.8.
Review of Actual Implementation of the Declaration
249
11.9.
Law in UK
250
11.9.1.
Purposes and Factors to be Taken into Account
250
11.9.2.
What Amounts to Commercial Working of the Patent
251
11.10.
̀License of Right' Repealed in Indian Law
251
11.11.
Compulsory Licensing Under the TRIPS Agreement
252
11.11.1.
Articles 31, 7 and 8 Considered
253
11.11.2.
Proportionality Test
253
11.11.3.
Guidelines for Quantum of Remuneration to the Patentee
254
11.12.
Enforcement of Patent Rights under TRIPS Agreement: Articles 41 to 49 Considered
255
ch. 12
Patents - Further Research and Experimental Use - Anti-competitive Practices
259
12.1.
Who is the Inventor
259
12.2.
Limits to Patentee's Exclusive Rights
260
12.3.
Experimental Use
260
12.3.1.
Experimental Business
260
12.4.
Exclusive Rights v. Right to Experiment
260
12.4.1.
Copyright Protection
261
12.5.
Economic Point of View
261
12.6.
Exceptions to Exclusive Rights
262
12.6.1.
For Commercial Use
264
12.6.2.
TRIPS Agreement Provisions
265
12.7.
Patent System and Anti-competitive Practices
265
12.7.1.
TRIPS Agreement
266
12.7.2.
How Anti-competitive Practices Arise
266
12.8.
National Laws on Anti-Competition
267
12.8.1.
In US and EU
267
12.8.2.
In India
267
12.8.3.
In Other Countries
268
12.8.4.
Case Law
268
12.8.5.
In UK
269
12.8.6.
Summing Up
269
ch. 13
Patent Rights and Exclusive Marketing Rights
271
13.1.
Transitional Provisions in the TRIPS Agreement
271
13.1.1.
Effect of the Transitional Provisions in TRIPS Agreement
272
13.1.2.
Critique of the above Provisions
272
13.2.
Exclusive Marketing Rights
272
13.3.
Working of the Transitional Provisions
273
13.4.
India's Mail Box Case
273
13.5.
Conclusions
275
ch. 14
Patent Rights and the Doha Declaration
277
14.1.
Article 6
277
14.1.1.
International Exhaustion v. National Exhaustion
278
14.1.2.
Regional Exhaustion
278
14.2.
Article 7
279
14.2.1.
Leads to Two Conclusions
279
14.3.
Article 8
279
14.4.
The Doha Declaration
280
14.4.1.
Analysis of the Declaration
280
14.5.
Subsequent Developments
281
14.6.
Recent Developments
282
14.6.1.
Seizure of Consignments of Generic Drugs
283
14.6.2.
Competition
283
14.7.
Bio-piracy of Traditional Knowledge and Wealth
284
14.7.1.
The Bonn Guidelines under the Convention of Biodiversity
284
14.7.2.
Necessity to Harmonize TRIPS with CBD
284
14.8.
The Doha WTO Ministerial Declaration
285
14.8.1.
Requires Relationship to be Examined but no Headway Made
285
14.8.2.
Doha Declaration on Public Health
286
14.8.3.
High Cost of Patented Drugs of MNCs
286
ch. 15
Reflections on Patent Law
289
15.1.
Guidelines Provided by the Statute of Monopolies (UK)
289
15.2.
Discovery/Invention
290
15.2.1.
Changes through Technological Innovations
291
15.2.2.
New use of Known Property
291
15.3.
Applications for Second Use
292
15.3.1.
Criticism of the above Practice
292
15.3.2.
Conclusion
293
15.3.3.
US Practice
293
15.4.
Exceptions to Patentability
294
15.4.1.
Decision of US Supreme Court in Chakrabarty's Patent Application
295
15.4.2.
Exception for Inventions Contrary to Public Order and Morality
295
15.4.3.
Exception to Patentability to Methods of Treatment
296
15.4.4.
Exception about Plant Varieties
297
15.4.5.
The Next Band of Exceptions Relate to ̀Biological Process'
297
15.4.6.
Computer Programs
298
15.4.7.
Criticism of US Practice which Tended to Influence Others
299
15.5.
New form of Ǹovelty'
300
15.5.1.
̀Format of Swiss Claim'
300
15.5.2.
Need for Clear Definitions
301
15.6.
Product Patents v. Generic Medicines
301
15.6.1.
Litigation
301
15.6.2.
What Happened to ̀Public Purpose'
302
15.7.
Doha Round of Negotiations: Ministerial Declaration on Public Health
302
15.7.1.
Customs Seizures of Medical Consignments
303
15.7.2.
India Moves the WTO Against Seizures of Medical Consignments
304
15.7.3.
TRIPS Plus
305
15.8.
Bio-piracy of Traditional Knowledge and Wealth
305
15.8.1.
Need for Harmonization between TRIPS and CBD
306
15.8.2.
Conclusion
306
15.9.
Exclusive Marketing Rights
307
15.9.1.
The Working of EMR Provisions
308
15.9.2.
Conclusion
308
Annex I
The Patents Act, 1970
309
Annex II
World Trade Organization
393
Bibliography
395
Table of Cases
399
Index
409