SPICY IP: Breaking "Scrabulous" News: Mattel Wins on Trademark Claim but Loses on Copyright

SPICY IP: Breaking "Scrabulous" News: Mattel Wins on Trademark Claim but Loses on Copyright

SCRABBLE vs. SCRABULOUS

Everyone knows the game SCRABBLE. We all would have played it sometime. Two brothers brought out an online version of it known as SCRABULOUS. The owners of scrabble filed a suit against them for violation of trademarks. The court came out with the decion in favour of SCRABBLE and ststed as follows: 

(i)The defendants (Agarwala brothers) were restrained from using SCRABULOUS, SCRABBLE or any other deceptively similar trademark.

(ii) The brothers were also restrained from metatagging, hyperlinking or including the infringing trademarks in the source code of their websites.

(iii) The court disagreed with the argument of the defendants that the mark SCRABBLE was "generic" in nature and therefore could not be protected.

APEDA ACT AMENDED

The union cabinet has approved the amendment to the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority Act (APEDA Act) vesting  it with statutory authority for registration and protection of intellectual property rights or similar rights (including geographical indications) in the special product names in India and elsewhere.

According to the amendment, the registration of basmati rice, etc. as a geographical indication under the geographical indications of goods (registration and protection) act 1999 can be initiated and APEDA can effectively protect the geographical indication in India and abroad.

INCREASE IN PATENT APPLICATIONS

According to the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) and Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs), the filing of patent applications has increased from 4824 in the year 1999-2000 to 28,882 applications in the year 2006-2007. As against 8,010 trademark (TM) registrations in 1999-2000, 109,361 TMs were registered in 2006-07. Also, the filing of applications for design has increased from 2874 in 1999-2000 to 5372 in 2006-07.

GI STATUS FOR PASHMINA

The GI Registry has granted GI status to Pashmina. This means that from now on all fine wool will not be known as Pashmina. Pashmina will be used only for that kind of wool which is made from the Pashmina goat in the Kashmir valley. The GI status was granted on Sep 12, 2008.

Pashmina is a kind of cashmere. Pashmina shawls are sold all over the world and the industry brings in around Rs 350- 360 crore for artisans in Kashmir.

Pakistan had filed an objection to the registration saying that they too produced the same kind of wool. A consultative committee set up for the purpose rejected the objection.

San DISK

South Korea's Samsung Electronics has released to the public its letter sent on Sept. 16 to the board of directors at SanDisk (SNDK) expressing deep disappointment over a delay in its $5.85 billion cash offer for the U.S. flash memory-card maker.Shortly after Samsung disclosed the proposal, SanDisk issued a statement saying its board "unanimously rejects" the offer (although it did not rule out a deal at a better price.Samsung currently pays SNDK over $350 million a year in royalties to use patent flash technology. A takeover would result in reducing these costs and making use of SND's extensive knowledge in these fields.

HARRY POTTER

A suit was filed by J.K. Rowling (author of Harry Potter series) and Times Warner against RDR Books for infringement of their Intellectual Property Rights. A website called Harry Potter Lexicon was created by Steven Jan Vander Ark, who is a librarian by profession. The lexicon lists characters, places, creatures, spells, potions and even a time line. The website is a very popular one among Harry Potter fans and Rowling had even given it an award as the best fan site. Mr. Vander Ark with the help of RDR Books decided to make a hard copy of the contents of the website. This induced Rowling along with Times Warner, who own the trade marks and copyright for Harry Potter file a case against RDR Books claiming that such a publication would hurt and infringe upon Rowling’s own copyright as she wanted to publish a lexicon of the same order in the near future.

The principle in law which is in question is the fair use doctrine, which allows the limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the right holders. Has Mr. Vander Ark infringed upon the rights of Rowling? 

The judge had ruled that Vander Ark had indeed infringed the rights of J.K. Rowling, thereby giving ruling the case in her favour. The matter seemed to have gone agisnt the defendents due the fact that a lot of material seems to have been copied verbatim by Vader Ark.

This judgement has created a serious precedent for derivative works as the original authors will try to stop people from publishing works based on the original content, thereby not recognising the work and labour of people who put in their own skill and labour to create derivate works. They too have rights and this must be recognised as well.