e

e NEWSLETTER	INDIA JURIS
	Advocates & Corporate Legal Consultants	November 2006
	Trademark & Patent Attorneys	New Delhi
	A Full Service Law Firm	newdelhi@indiajuris.com
	Tel:+91-120- 6567067 Fax: +91-120-2776538	http://www.indiajuris.com

Areas of Practice - Corporate Commercial M&A JV Takeovers Foreign Investments Litigation Arbitration Patent Trade Mark Design Copyright INDUSTRIES - IT Telecommunications Biotechnology Infrastructure Automobile Real Estate Shipping Banking Finance OFFICES New Delhi Mumbai New York

This E-Newsletter has been published by India Juris, full service Indian law firm with special expertise in Business, Corporate & IP laws, on requests from clients and associates worldwide with an object to keep them abreast of latest legal & business developments in India.

Contents

Corporate & Commercial laws

* Lock-in on pre-IPO shares before IPO held by Venture Capital Funds

* Overseas Direct Investment by Regulated Entities in the Financial Sector

Intellectual Property Laws

* Yahoo! Inc Vs Sanjay Shah and Ors (2006)

* La Chemise Lacoste & Another Vs. R.H.Garments & Others (16 March'06) (Delhi High Court)

Corporate & Commercial laws

Lock-in on pre-IPO shares before IPO held by Venture Capital Funds

Earlier, pre-issue shares of an unlisted company making an Initial Public Offering (IPO) are not required to be locked in, if the same are held by Venture Capital Funds (VCFs) or Foreign Venture Capital Investors (FVCIs) registered with SEBI. Now the benefit of this exemption from lock-in is restricted only to the following:

shares held by VCFs or FVCIs registered with SEBI, for a period of at least one year as on the date of filing draft prospectus with SEBI;
shares issued to SEBI registered VCFs/ FVCIs upon conversion of convertible instruments during the period of one year prior to the date of filing draft prospectus with SEBI, provided that the period of holding such convertible instruments as fully paid up, together with the period of holding shares resulting from conversion, by the VCFs and FVCIs, is at least one year as on the date of filing the draft prospectus with SEBI.

In other words now only those VCs & PEs who have invested more than a year before the company goes for IPO can sell their stakes on listing The restriction regarding lock-in, shall be applicable to all offer documents, which are yet to be registered with the Registrar of Companies

Overseas Direct Investment by Regulated Entities in the Financial Sector

Earlier the entities engaged in financial services activities in India making investment in non-financial services activities overseas were not required to comply with the additional conditions mentioned in Regulation 7 of the Notification FEMA120 / RB-2004 dated July 7, 2004. With a view to assess the impact of the overseas operations of such entities on a consolidated basis, now regulated entities in financial sector in India investing overseas in any activity will also have to comply with the conditions stipulated in Regulation 7 of the said Notification .

It is further clarified that trading in Commodities Exchanges overseas and setting up JV/WOS for trading in Overseas Commodities Exchanges will be reckoned as financial services activity and will require clearance from the Forward Markets Commission (FMC). The FMC has recently put in place guidelines for allowing FMC registered members of Commodity Exchanges to undertake commodity related activities abroad. Indian entities desirous of setting up of JV/WOS overseas for trading in overseas commodities exchanges may, therefore, approach the FMC for regulatory clearance.

Unregulated Indian entities engaged in the financial services activities in India may invest in non-financial sector activities overseas subject to Regulation 6 of the said Notification.

Intellectual Property Laws

Yahoo! Inc Vs Sanjay Shah and Ors

The plaintiff has been using the trademark ‘YAHOO’ since the year 1994. The defendants have used the plaintiffs mark ‘YAHOO’ even after the issuance of a legal notice by them. The main contention of the plaintiff was that the usage of the mark by the defendant is mala fide and is causing loss to the reputation of the plaintiff. The plaintiff sought permanent injunction from the court. The defendants stated that the plaintiffs had no locus standi to file the suit, further the defendants also contended that the suit suffers from delay of laches.

In light of the facts and circumstance of the case a decree for permanent injunction was passed in favour of the plaintiffs also the amount 5,05,000 /-claimed as damages was decreed in their favor

La Chemise Lacoste & Another Vs. R.H.Garments & Others (16 March'06) (Delhi High Court)

The plaintiff has the trade mark ‘LACOSTE’, ‘CROCODILE’ and ‘CHEMISE LACOSTE’ registered as a device along with the word label under 206 countries and has been using the said trademark for manufacturing T-shirts etc. since 1927. It also has the trademark registered in India. The reproduction of the artistic work and crocodile device by the defendant’s leads to infringement of their copyright, also the manufacturing of the T-shirts marked with the said trademark also leads to infringement of their trademark and amounts to passing off their goods in the name of the plaintiffs.

The Court held that in the light of the facts and circumstances and the evidence produced by the plaintiff with respect to the accounts, usage and registrations in different countries a perpetual injunction is passed against the defendants from further usage of the said trade mark. A mandatory injunction is also passed against the defendants whereby they are directed to hand over all the goods that they manufacture in the name of the said trade marks’ to the plaintiffs. A copyright infringement is also made out in favor of the plaintiffs in the artistic work of the crocodile.

Chennai - chennai@indiajuris.com Mumbai - mumbai@indiajuris.com New York - newyork@indiajuris.com

If you do not wish to receive e-newsletter, type 'REMOVE & the E-mail Address to be removed' in the subject and resend it to us.