Patents Questions and Answers

Q: Under the Patents Act, 1970, a patent is granted to an inventor in India. Which of the following correctly reflects a limitation on the patentee's rights under the law ?

The limitation is that the Government may use the invention for its own purposes without the consent of the patentee.Section 47 of the Patents Act, 1970 makes every patent subject to the condition that the Government may use the patented invention merely for its own use, and import patented medicines for its own use or for distribution in government dispensaries and hospitals. Sections 99 and 100 also allow the Central Government, and persons authorised by it, to use an invention for the purposes of Government, generally on terms and royalty agreed or fixed by the High Court.Government use does not void the patent or strip the patentee of all rights; the patent stays in force and the patentee may be entitled to remuneration. The statement that the Government cannot use it without permission is the opposite of the law.

Q: Which one of the following doctrines prevailing in most of the legal systems that allows a court to hold a party liable for patent infringement even though the infringing device or process does not fall within the literal scope of a patent claim, but nevertheless is equivalent to the claimed.

This is the doctrine of equivalents.Under the doctrine of equivalents, a product or process that does not fall within the literal words of a patent claim still infringes if it performs substantially the same function in substantially the same way to achieve substantially the same result as the claimed invention. It stops infringers escaping liability by making trivial changes, and was affirmed in the United States in Graver Tank v. Linde Air Products (1950).Deceptive similarity is a trade mark concept, and 'literal conflict' and 'colourable deception' are not the recognised name of this patent doctrine.

Q: Which one of the committee had examined the question of revision of patent law and advised the government in 1959 to retain the patent system in India, however recommended major changes in the law which formed the basis of the introduction of the Patents Bill, 1965 ?

It was the Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar Committee (printed 'Rajgopala').Appointed in 1957, the committee under Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar submitted its report on the revision of patent law in 1959. It advised retaining the patent system but recommended major changes, such as process-only patents for food and medicines and shorter terms, which formed the basis of the Patents Bill, 1965 and the Patents Act, 1970.The Bakshi Tek Chand Committee (1948-50) reviewed the old 1911 Act earlier. The Wolfenden Committee was a British inquiry on homosexual offences and prostitution, and Justice M.C. Chagla was associated with other inquiries, not patent reform.

Q: Which one of the following areas has not been provided under proviso clause of Art 27(2) of the TRIPS regarding patentable subject matter ?

The ground not in Article 27(2) is inventions which contravene the provisions of a member's constitution or basic law.Article 27(2) of the TRIPS Agreement allows members to exclude from patentability inventions whose commercial exploitation within their territory must be prevented to protect ordre public or morality, including to protect human, animal or plant life or health or to avoid serious prejudice to the environment, provided the exclusion is not made merely because domestic law prohibits the exploitation.Options A, B and D paraphrase these permitted grounds. Contravening a constitution or basic law is not a ground named in the Article, and the proviso specifically rejects exclusions based only on domestic prohibition.

Q: Which one of following is not the ground for grant of compulsory licence one patent after the expiration of three years u/s 84(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 ?

The one that is not a ground is that the patented invention relates to medicine useful against health hazards in India.Section 84(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 allows any interested person to apply for a compulsory licence after three years from the grant of a patent on any of three grounds: (a) the reasonable requirements of the public with respect to the invention have not been satisfied; (b) the invention is not available to the public at a reasonably affordable price; or (c) the invention is not worked in the territory of India.Options A, B and C are these three grounds. The mere fact that a patent concerns a medicine is not a ground under Section 84(1); public health emergencies are dealt with separately by Section 92.

Under the Patents Act, 1970, a patent is granted to an inventor in India. Which of the following correctly reflects a limitation on the patentee's rights under the law ?

A.The patentee loses all rights once the invention is used by the Government
B.The Government may use the invention for its own purposes without the consent of the patentee
C.The invention cannot be used by the Government without permission
D.The patent becomes void if used by a government authority

Exam Year(s)

AIBE - 2026,

Answer: B

The limitation is that the Government may use the invention for its own purposes without the consent of the patentee.

Section 47 of the Patents Act, 1970 makes every patent subject to the condition that the Government may use the patented invention merely for its own use, and import patented medicines for its own use or for distribution in government dispensaries and hospitals. Sections 99 and 100 also allow the Central Government, and persons authorised by it, to use an invention for the purposes of Government, generally on terms and royalty agreed or fixed by the High Court.

Government use does not void the patent or strip the patentee of all rights; the patent stays in force and the patentee may be entitled to remuneration. The statement that the Government cannot use it without permission is the opposite of the law.

Discuss in Forum

Which one of the following doctrines prevailing in most of the legal systems that allows a court to hold a party liable for patent infringement even though the infringing device or process does not fall within the literal scope of a patent claim, but nevertheless is equivalent to the claimed.

A.Doctrine of Literal Conflict
B.Doctrine of Deceptive Similarity
C.Doctrine of Equivalents
D.Doctrine of Colourable Deception

Exam Year(s)

MH SET - 2020, SET Exam - 2020,

Answer: C

This is the doctrine of equivalents.

Under the doctrine of equivalents, a product or process that does not fall within the literal words of a patent claim still infringes if it performs substantially the same function in substantially the same way to achieve substantially the same result as the claimed invention. It stops infringers escaping liability by making trivial changes, and was affirmed in the United States in Graver Tank v. Linde Air Products (1950).

Deceptive similarity is a trade mark concept, and 'literal conflict' and 'colourable deception' are not the recognised name of this patent doctrine.

Discuss in Forum

Which one of the committee had examined the question of revision of patent law and advised the government in 1959 to retain the patent system in India, however recommended major changes in the law which formed the basis of the introduction of the Patents Bill, 1965 ?

A.Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand Committee
B.Justice N. Rajgopala Ayyangar Committee
C.Wolfenden Committee
D.Justice M.C. Chhagla Committee

Exam Year(s)

MH SET - 2020, SET Exam - 2020,

Answer: B

It was the Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar Committee (printed 'Rajgopala').

Appointed in 1957, the committee under Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar submitted its report on the revision of patent law in 1959. It advised retaining the patent system but recommended major changes, such as process-only patents for food and medicines and shorter terms, which formed the basis of the Patents Bill, 1965 and the Patents Act, 1970.

The Bakshi Tek Chand Committee (1948-50) reviewed the old 1911 Act earlier. The Wolfenden Committee was a British inquiry on homosexual offences and prostitution, and Justice M.C. Chagla was associated with other inquiries, not patent reform.

Discuss in Forum

Which one of the following areas has not been provided under proviso clause of Art 27(2) of the TRIPS regarding patentable subject matter ?

A.Members may exclude from patentability inventions commercial exploitation of which is necessary to protect ordre public
B.Members may exclude from patentability inventions preventing within their territory of the commercial exploitation of which is necessary to protect morality or serious prejudice to environment
C.Members may exclude from patentability inventions preventing within their territory which contravene the provision of their constitution or basic law of the land
D.Members may exclude from patentability inventions within their territory of the commercial exploitation to protect human, animal or plant life or health

Exam Year(s)

MH SET - 2021, SET Exam - 2021,

Answer: C

The ground not in Article 27(2) is inventions which contravene the provisions of a member's constitution or basic law.

Article 27(2) of the TRIPS Agreement allows members to exclude from patentability inventions whose commercial exploitation within their territory must be prevented to protect ordre public or morality, including to protect human, animal or plant life or health or to avoid serious prejudice to the environment, provided the exclusion is not made merely because domestic law prohibits the exploitation.

Options A, B and D paraphrase these permitted grounds. Contravening a constitution or basic law is not a ground named in the Article, and the proviso specifically rejects exclusions based only on domestic prohibition.

Discuss in Forum

Which one of following is not the ground for grant of compulsory licence one patent after the expiration of three years u/s 84(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 ?

A.That the reasonable requirements of the public with respect to the patented invention have not been satisfied
B.That the patented invention is not available to the public at a reasonable affordable price
C.That the patented invention is not worked in the territory of India
D.That the patented invention is related with the medicine which is useful to deal with health hazards in the territory of India

Exam Year(s)

MH SET - 2021, SET Exam - 2021,

Answer: D

The one that is not a ground is that the patented invention relates to medicine useful against health hazards in India.

Section 84(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 allows any interested person to apply for a compulsory licence after three years from the grant of a patent on any of three grounds: (a) the reasonable requirements of the public with respect to the invention have not been satisfied; (b) the invention is not available to the public at a reasonably affordable price; or (c) the invention is not worked in the territory of India.

Options A, B and C are these three grounds. The mere fact that a patent concerns a medicine is not a ground under Section 84(1); public health emergencies are dealt with separately by Section 92.

Patents Questions and Answers

Topics

Other Subjects

Tags: Patents Questions and Answers

About Us

Patents Questions and Answers

Topics

Other Subjects

Tags: Patents Questions and Answers

About Us

Stay informed about all important Dates & Notifications