intellectual property laws vs competition laws

CHENNAI3rd Floor, ‘Creative Enclave’,

148-150, Luz Church Road,Mylapore,

Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821

BANGALORE Suite 920, Level 9,

Raheja Towers,26-27, M G Road,

Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400

COIMBATOREBB1, Park Avenue,

# 48, Race Course Road,Coimbatore - 641018.

Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS VS COMPETITION LAWS

SUCHITRA BAI PATENTS DEPARTMENT



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW

• IPRs protection is a policy tool meant to foster innovation, which benefits consumers through the development of new and improved goods and services, and spurs economic growth. It bestows on innovation the right to legitimately exclude for a limited period of time, other parties from the benefits arising from new knowledge and more specifically from the commercial use of innovative products and processes based on that new knowledge.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

COMPETITION LAW

• Competition Law is an essential mechanism in curbing market distortions, disciplining anti-competitive practices preventing monopoly and abuse of monopoly.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

OBJECT OF COMPETITION LAW

A. Prohibit Anti-competition Agreements.

B. Prevent Abuse of Dominant Position and

C. Regulate Mergers and Acquisition.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

WHAT CONSTITUTES ANTI COMPETITIVE AGREEMENTS

• Agreement which limit the production and supply of Goods and Products.

• Agreement to allocate market.

• Price Fixing Agreements.

• Exclusive Supply Agreement.

• Exclusive Distribution Agreement.

• Conditional Purchase.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

TYPES OF AGREEMENTS

• Horizontal Agreements executed among enterprises who compete within same business. This agreement is presumed to be illegal.

• Vertical Agreements executed among independent enterprise. Rule of reasons [Logic] applies to this agreement.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

MAHYCO-MONSANTO

Mahyco-Monsanto (50-50 joint venture between Maharashtra Hybrid Corporation and American Agricultural Company) was found guilty of price gouging (price above the market price when no alternative retailer is available) in a Bt Cotton case filed by the Andhra Pradesh government and some civil society organizations before the MRTP Commission of India. Mahyco-Monsanto was charging an excessively high royalty fee for its Bt gene which made the seed too expensive for the farmers. As there was no competition due to their IPR on Bt cotton seeds, Mahyco-Monsanto had a monopoly and had acted arbitrarily.

The Competition law applies to IPR in relation to abuse of dominant position and combination. Therefore abuse of dominance due to an IPR is liable for action under the Indian Competition Act just as IPR- related dealings in combination leading to an anti – competitive effect.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

IN RE – TELE DIRECT CASE

• It was observed that the selective refusal to license a

trademark constitutes an abuse of the dominant position.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

IPR CASES RELATING TO ABUSE OF DOMINANCE

• Predatory Price:

means the sale of goods or provision of services at a price which is below the cost as may be determined by regulations, of production of the goods or provision of services with a view to reduce competition or eliminate the competitors.

• Dominant Position:

means a position of strength, enjoyed by an enterprise in the relevant market in India which enables it to (i) operate independently of competitive forces prevailing in the relevant market and (ii) affect it competitors or consumers of the relevant market in its favour.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

COMPULSORY LICENSING

A compulsory licence is an involuntary contract between a willing buyer and an unwilling seller imposed and enforced by the state.

Compulsory licensing can be granted on the grounds of the existence of: (i) a refusal to licence and (ii) anti-competitive exercises of IPRs by patent holders.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

EXCEPTIONS TO ANTI COMPETITION

Section 3 (5) of the Competition Act is a exception to Intellectual Property Law

• Agreement to protect IPRs such as Patent, TM and Copyright.

• Agreement relating to Geographical Indication.

• Agreement relating to Industrial Designs

• Agreement relating to Lay Out Designs.

• Agreement relating to export of Goods.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

CONCLUSION

IPR confers rights to the property holder to enjoy the returns of the disclosure, while competition law is required to deal with IPR in a manner of not absolutely curtailing it rather reconciling it with the goals of competition law. Competition law should impose regulation on IPR only to the extent of interference by holder of IPR in the domain of competition law. This will facilitate the long term relationship between the two along with fulfilling the goal of innovation and economic welfare.



Chennai - 600 004.Tel: +91 - 44 - 2498 4821



Bangalore - 560 001.Tel: +91 - 80 - 6546 2400



Tel: +91 - 422 – 6552921

EMAIL

[email protected]

WEBSITE

www.altacit.com

THANK YOU