Aug
8
India Now 2nd-largest Wireless Market after China
Filed Under Emerging Sectors, India Business, India vs China, Mobile Telecom | Leave a Comment
The number of wireless subscribers in India has reached 250 million, making India the second-largest wireless market in the world, says a World Bank study titled: The Role of Mobile Phones in Sustainable Rural Poverty Reduction.
Authored by Asheeta Bhavnani, Rowena Won-Wai Chiu, Subramaniam Janakiram and Peter Silarszky, the study says India is now second only to China, with tele-density already surpassing the 25 per cent mark.
Currently, China is adding about 6-7 million new subscribers per month, India about 8-9 million and the US about 2-3 million, it notes.
The private sector is also active in India and there are a number of telecommunication companies providing mobile telephone services who have to compete for market share and meet consumer expectations. Mobile telephony has grown rapidly in India, especially during the last three years.
The study states that mobile telephony has a positive impact on economic welfare by generating GDP; job generation (both in the mobile industry and the wider economy); productivity increases; and taxation revenue with mobile operators usually being a sizeable contributor.
For more details, click here.
Jul
27
Indian Trademark Law - Statues, Requirements & Process
Filed Under Research & Development, Indian Companies, India Business, India vs China, Intellectual Property | Leave a Comment
Indian Trademark Law has been codified in conformity with the International Trademark Law and is about to undergo an amendment to be at par International Trademark Law.
Recently India has signed Madrid Protocol that will allow Foreign Applicants to file an International Application designating India like many countries around the globe e.g China.
Though unlike China and many other countries Multi class filing is allowed in India.
Statues:
The various statues dealing with Intellectual property laws in India are as follows:
1. Trademarks Act, 1999
2. Copyright Act, 1957
3. Patents Act, 1970 as amended by Patents (Amendments) Act, 2005
4. Designs Act, 2005
5. Code of Civil Procedures, 1908
6. Indian Penal Code, 1860
7. Geographical Indication of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act, 1999
8. Semiconductor, Integrated Circuit Layout Design Act, 2000
9. Plants Varieties Protection and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001
10. Information Technology Act, 2000
Requirement:
A ‘Trademark’ means a mark capable of being represented graphically and which is capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of others. A ‘Mark’ includes a device, brand, heading, label, ticket, name (including abbreviations), signature, word, letter, numerals, shape of goods, packaging or combination of colors and any combination thereof.
The two main requirements of a trademark are that it must be distinctive (adapted to distinguish the goods/services of the applicant from that of others) and not deceptive. Therefore while selecting a trademark, words that are directly descriptive of the goods, common surnames or geographical names should be avoided as these confer weaker protection to the proprietor even if registered. Now the concept of “well known mark” has been introduced after the last amendment and Section 2 (zg) defines a well known mark as:
“Well-known trademark, in relation to any goods or services, means a mark which has become so to the substantial segment of the public which uses such goods or receives such services that the use of such mark in relation to other goods or services would likely to be taken as indicating a connection in the course of trade or rendering of services between those goods or services and a person using the mark in relation to the first mentioned goods or services.” While determining whether the mark is well-known mark, the registrar will take in to consideration while determining that the mark is a well known mark.
(a) the knowledge or recognition of the alleged well known mark in the relevant section of the public including knowledge obtained as a result of promotion of the trademark.
(b) the duration, extent and geographical area of any use for that trademark.
(c) The duration, extent and geographical area for any promotion of the trademark including advertising or publicity and presentation at fairs or exhibition of the goods or services
in which the trademark appears.
(d) The duration and geographical area of any registration of any publication for registration of that trademark under this Act to the extent that they reflect the use or recognition of that
trademark.
(e) The record of successful enforcements of the rights in that trademark, in particular the extent to which the trademark has been recognized as a well known trademark by any Court or Registrar under that record.
Whereas a trademark has been determined to be well known in at least one relevant section of the public in India by any court or Registrar, the Registrar shall consider that trademark as a well known trademark for registration under this Act.
“Relevant section of Public” may be actual or potential consumers of, persons involved in channels of distribution of or business circles dealing with the type of goods or services to which the mark is applied.
The Registrar is not required to consider the following facts while determining a well known trademark.
a) The Trademark has been used in India
b) The Trademark has been registered
c) The application for registration of the Trademark has been filed in India.
d) The trademark is well known in or has been registered in, or in respect of which an application for registration has been filed in any jurisdiction other than India or
e) The trademark is well known to the public at large in India.
Priority:
For claiming a priority from an application filed in United States a corresponding application should be filed in India within 6 months of date of filing of original application.
Various Grounds for refusal:
Absolute grounds:
Section 9 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 sets out the absolute grounds for refusal of trademarks, which can be grouped under following heads:
a) Trademark is devoid of distinctive character;
b) Trademarks that are descriptive;
c) Trademarks likely to deceive of cause confusion;
d) Trademarks or signs that are customary in current language and in the bonafide and established and customary practice of the trade;
e) Trademarks comprising scandalous or obscene matter or likely to hurt religious susceptibilities in India;
f) Trademarks consisting of shape which are purely functional or are necessary to obtain a technical result or give substantial value to the goods; or
g) Trademarks whose use is prohibited under Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950.
Prohibition:
Section 13 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 prohibits registration of any word as trademark which is:
a) Commonly used and accepted name of any chemical element or any chemical compound (as distinguished from mixtures) in respect of a chemical substance or preparation; or
b) Declared by the World Health Organization and notified as such by the Registrar, as an International non-proprietary names.
Relative grounds of refusal:
Section 11 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 sets out the relative grounds for refusal of trademarks, which can be grouped under following heads:
a) identical or similar to a previous mark with and/or without similar or identical goods;
b) Prohibition of use of the trademark under passing off or law of copyright;
Statutory defense available under the Act:
For registration:
a) Honest concurrent use;
b) Acquiescence; or
c) Prior user
Against Injunction suit or criminal matters
a) Use in accordance with honest practices in Industrial or commercial matters;
b) Parallel Imports;
c) Fair use in description of the goods or services; or
d) Generic ness.
Special Considerations in case of well known mark:
As per Section 11 of the Trademarks Act, while considering an application for registration of a trademark and opposition filed in respect thereof the Registrar shall
a) protect a well known trademark against the identical or similar trademark.
b) take into consideration the bad faith involved either of the applicant or the opponent affecting the rights relating to the trade mark.
However this provision shall not effect the trademark if it trademark has been registered in good faith disclosing the material information to the Registrar or where right to a
trademark has been acquired through use in good faith before the commencement of this Act.
Enforcement of Trademarks Rights:
Opposition (before the Registrar) and Cancellation (before the Registrar as well as Appellate Board)
Opposition can only be done after publication of the trademark and within 3 months of date of availability of Journal. One month extension is available if sought before the expiry of 3
months time.
Cancellation on the ground of non-use for a period of 5 years and 3 months and proof of intention on part of the registered proprietor not to use the trademark at the filing date and nonuse till the cancellation petition.
Before the Courts: Ex-parte Injunction, Permanent Injunction, Anton Pillar Order, and /or Arrest and Seizure of goods (irrespective of registration).
Assignment/ license:
Trademarks are now recognized as a “movable property” under the Indian law and can be therefore assigned/ licensed. A trademark can be assigned with or without the goodwill
attached to it.
Renewal:
The trademarks can be renewed perpetually, are renewable for a period of 10 years on payment of prescribed fees.
Express processing:
Under Indian trademark law now it is possible to expedite the various proceeding e.g. search, examination etc. by filing a request with prescribed fees. Indian Trademarks law are at par with the International laws and has stringent procedures for safeguarding and protecting interest of the proprietor of mark.
The author, Sudhir Aswal, is an Advocate and Registered Patent And Trademark Attorney with Aswal Associates and handles IPR division of the firm and is having the vast experience of having being associated with various premier IPR firms of India in the past. The author is also a member of APAA. Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Sudhir_Aswal
Nov
23
In 2002, the bilateral trade between India & China was just USD 5 billion.
Nov
16
China overtakes India in Clinical Trials
Filed Under Research & Development, Healthcare, India vs China, Intellectual Property | Leave a Comment
China has overtaken India in an important measure of drug research activity - Clinical Trials.
In an analysis done by the Financial Times, China now has 274 registered clinical trials underway, compared to 260 in India. Until recently, India had been in the lead.
China’s lead is likely to grow, as Novartis makes good on its plan to shift trials away from India in light of its recent setback in a key patent ruling. Last year, China grabbed $2.2 billion of the global action on drug R&D. By 2010, the country expects that to grow to $10 billion, or 2 percent of world’s total R&D budget. AstraZeneca, Novartis, Eli Lilly and GlaxoSmithKline among the leading pharma companies with big plans there.
Roadblocks continue to pose a problem in China, of course, as regulators continue to be slow in releasing tissue samples for analysis at foreign laboratories, IP questions remain and the regulatory environment remains mired in controversy over corruption scandals.
But on the other hand, low costs and a ready access to patient populations as well as a plentiful supply of researchers makes China the up-and-coming country in clinical research.
For more info, here’s the Financial Times report and here’s the latest article from Time
Nov
15
FDI in India making big gains in 2007
Filed Under Emerging Sectors, Indian Government, IT BPO KPO Services, India Business, India vs China, India Investment Opportunities, Mobile Telecom, India Real Estate | 1 Comment
Before we delve more into trend shown in the recently published FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) in India, it is important to make it clear that we are referring to FDI equity inflows. Reason behind doing this is to ensure that we restrict our discussion to only investments that are coming in for long term and have direct impact on industry. The Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, India published the FDI numbers for the period of April–July 2007 recently. For the full statistical details, please visit the article on their website (http://www.dipp.nic.in/fdi_statistics/india_fdi_july_2007.pdf).
Let’s start with the macro numbers to begin with. The FDI equity inflow for the first four months in 2007–08 is $5.614 billion which is 97% higher YoY when it was $2.848 billion. This growth rate is very impressive and is reflected in India being 2nd most attractive destination for FDI for 2007, according to UNCTAD’s world investment report published last month.
One note of caution though is that FDI inflow in July 2007 was $705 million, which compared to earlier three months, is significantly lower. We don’t need to read a lot into this but maybe it is good to bear in mind that the credit crisis really started getting serious during the later stages of reporting period and it would be interesting to watch out for next set of numbers coming out.
In the meantime, if we see which sectors of the Indian economy showed most consistent growth, then the top 3 by amount of FDI inflow are: Services Sector, Telecom and Housing & Real Estate. But if we compare the industries on the amount of FDI for last financial year and these four months, the top 3 most attractive sectors appear to be Housing & Real Estate, Construction activities and Telecom. For Telecom, I feel that the sector is now peaking and there are unlikely to be many opportunities in the future to improve on the current growth.
The Real Estate and Infrastructure sectors – both look very promising for investments because infrastructure has been identified as the primary bottleneck for growth in India and the government is making a concerted effort to provide more impetus to the sector. This involves deregulating to make it easier for companies to invest money, either directly, through partnerships or through exchange traded funds. This trend is reflected in the high growth shown by the FDI in the overall real estate structure, and this sector is expected to show similar impressive growth in FDI for next 3–5 years.
Nov
8
India vs China- Comparison on E-Commerce potential
Filed Under Energy, Healthcare, Indian Companies, Training & Education, India vs China, Internet in India, Mobile Telecom, Intellectual Property, New Media, E-Business, India Investment Opportunities | Leave a Comment
The two giant Asian economies are competing on every front to be the biggest one in the world. One significant aspect of this race lies in E-Commerce. Both these economies are expected to have more Internet users than the U.S. by 2010.
While India got its first taste of Internet in 1986, establishing ERNET, China got Internet connectivity as late as 1993. But within one year it had 3.5 times as many Internet users as India. Despite the huge difference in numbers, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) puts India in the group of “E-business followers” and China in the group of “E-business laggards”. The most apparent reasons for this difference are the government policies. China has only one guarded access to the World Wide Web. Internet users cannot access a range of foreign web sites. Domestic web sites are checked at the source through a registration process and content monitoring. This has hampered adoption of the Internet for a variety of commercial uses.
In India, on the other hand, while the government has been criticized for its late awakening to cyber laws, the initial un-monitored period proved a boon for E-Commerce. Though post 2000, India has taken measures to keep a check on the happenings on the Internet. A report by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) discusses Indian government’s efforts to compel users to disclose keys or decrypted files to government agencies. Also, India’s IT Bill has a special section on offences dealing with the publication or transmission of “obscene material”.
Table 1: Relative advantages and disadvantages of China and India in Internet Development
|
|
Relative advantage |
Relative disadvantage |
|
China |
Higher per capita GDP |
No e-commerce and digital signature |
|
Higher investment in telecom sector resulting in higher tele-density |
||
|
Higher international bandwidth |
Control on Internet content |
|
|
Self-dependent in most IT products |
||
|
Cheaper Internet access rates |
||
|
India |
Well-developed private sector with both |
Less Political leadership to create an E-Business hub in India. |
|
Democratic tradition and transparent legal system |
Stifling bureaucracy and red tape (though much reduced than 10 years back) |
|
|
Large middle class aware of global brands |
||
|
Large English speaking work force |
Higher illiteracy rate |
|
|
Extensive networks of contacts created by expatriates |
||
|
World leader in software development and IT services |
Numerous different languages to be addressed to reach the full range of population |
Factors such as larger population, higher per capita GDP, indigenously produced IT products, well-developed data network, and higher international bandwidth make Chinese market more attractive for several e-commerce applications. The penetration rates of mobile and broadband technologies in China. In particular, China has a bigger market for applications such as stock trading and financial transactions. China’s recent entry in the WTO has further increased its telecom and Internet development potential. However, unlike India, China does not yet have formal laws to govern e-commerce transactions and companies have to rely on conventional laws in case of disputes.
On the other hand, availability of 50 million intelligent English speaking workforce at cheap rates, a large proportion of that being computer literate, make India an attractive place for outsourcing. Companies located in developed countries can significantly reduce their operating costs by employing Indian tele-workers in less critical steps of the value chain such as back-office services as well as in higher value-added services such as design and engineering and education. The upcoming bandwidth boom in India will further increase the tele-working potential by enhancing the quality of telecom services.
Since a large proportion of Chinese view information written in Chinese language, the best way to target Chinese Internet users is to provide content in Chinese language. Whereas about 50 million of Indians are fluent in English, remaining 950 million speak more than 500 different local dialects and the success of a company is a function of its ability to identify the linguistic segments that can be served profitably. But for any company looking to enter, it does put India at a severe disadvantage.
Unlike in western countries, most of the transactions in China and India are conducted on cash basis and thus e-commerce companies are required to provide alternatives such as cash on delivery, wire transfers and checks to facilitate e-commerce. This is quite different from the west, where plastic money has been in use for long, and online transactions have more or less been accepted as safe.
