Canonsphere

CSINv3
Menu
Submit a Manuscript
Category

Issue 2

Category
Archive

SHORT ARTICLE- STUDY OF CYBERBULLYING IN INDIA AGAINST WOMEN AND ITS LEGAL REMEDIES AND CHALLENGES

This short article has been written by Manali Palit. She is a law student at Seacom Skills University.

ABSTRACT

Cyberbullying is a particularly heinous form of cybercrime; it is different from traditional bullying because of its far-reaching impact through the digital space. Although bullying is not a new concept, its digital form, cyberbullying, has become an accepted “new evil” in today’s connected society. Cyberbullying disproportionately affects women, who are frequently viewed as the most vulnerable portion of society. Women and girls are more vulnerable to online harassment due to the growing accessibility of the internet and mobile technology, endangering their safety and privacy.

This study explores the unique challenges faced by women in the online space, mainly focusing on the rising issue of cyberbullying. It examines the role of the Indian legal system, studies all the laws relating to this problem, and studies related case laws advocating for a human rights-based approach to empower women, freedom of expression, and protection from violence in cyberspace. The paper highlights the importance of measures, well-informed policies, and collaborative efforts of citizens and government to mitigate risks and promote women’s well-being online. By understanding both societal and legal perspectives, The study emphasizes the necessity of an all-encompassing plan to stop cyberbullying and provide a safer online space for Indian women.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading
Archive

SHORT ARTICLE- A MAJOR CONCERN OF BIOPIRACY FOR TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE UNDER THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN INDIA.

This Short article has been written by Sadhana Umashankar Prasad. Sadhana is a law student at Gokul Global University, Sidhpur, Gujarat.

ABSTRACT

India is one of the largest countries in the world with different biodiversity. Mainly, the livelihoods of indigenous peoples depend on the preservation and protection of traditional knowledge about the use and operation of biological and natural resources. In recent years, traditional knowledge has become more and more important, and multinational companies and research institutions have used this knowledge for commercial purposes for free. This jeopardizes the protection of traditional knowledge by local and indigenous communities, which seems to be one of the most contentious and difficult issues. Even India’s dominant intellectual property, access and benefit sharing paradigm cannot fully protect knowledge because it reflects Western norms and laws and only focuses on the protection of intellectual property rights in the community. India has witnessed many incidents of biological plagiarism and a more comprehensive approach is needed to protect community rights and novices and biological genetic resources from such misappropriation. By enumerating various cases of biological piracy, the necessary steps to protect new technologies and biodiversity are necessary. Even India’s dominant IPRs, access and benefit sharing paradigm cannot fully protect knowledge because it reflects Western norms and laws and only focuses on the protection of IPRs in the community. India’s traditional knowledge is proving to be a powerful weapon in the fight against false patents, sometimes referred to as “bio-piracy”. Our country has witnessed many incidents of bio piracy and a good inclusive approach is needed to protect the rights of the community, novices and biological genetic resources from such misuse. By enumerating the various cases of bio-piracy, it is necessary to take necessary steps to protect new technologies and biodiversity.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading
Archive

CASE COMMENT- KAVIRAJ PANDIT DURGA DUTT SHARMA VS NAVARATNA PHARMACEUTICAL LABORATORIES

This Case Comment has been written by  Pranshutosh Kumar. He is a Law student at UPES, Dehradun.

ABSTRACT

The case has been a landmark decision in India on trademarks law and the interaction between the statutory remedies of trademark infringement of the Trade Marks Act, 1940 (infringement as a statutory remedy) and the common law action of passing off (infringement as a common law action). The respondent, who had been in business since 1926, the registered proprietor of the marks Navaratna and Navaratna Pharmaceutical Laboratories filed an action, contending that the use by the appellant of the name Navaratna Kalpa in relation to Ayurvedic medicines amounted both to infringement and passing-off. The appellant argued that Navaratna was generic at Ayurvedic language, had a lack of distinguishability under section 6(1) and that packaging differences excluded confusion.

The passing-off claim of the District Court was rejected but the infringement in the supply of composite marks against Navaratna Pharmaceutical Laboratories was seen as infringement since it was found to have acquired distinctiveness by the continued use of a mark since before the date of February 25, 1937, under Section 6(3). This was upheld by the High Court and the petition by the appellant seeking a rectification was rejected.

The Supreme Court, on appeal, made a clear distinction between passing off – a cause that needs to prove reputation, misrepresentation, and harm – and statutory infringement whose sole, deceptively similar mark is sufficient when the plaintiff has proven his or her mark indeed is registered and similar in terms of core elements. The Court also ruled that when considering claims of infringement of trademarks the distinction between packaging or labeling would not excuse liability where there was a deceptively similar core mark and proof of intent or actual confusion was not required. The claim of fair simultaneous use under Section 10(2) was abrogated because they failed to make it in lower courts.

The ruling supported the respondent of exclusively exercising his rights, emphasizing the importance of honoring the primacy of trademark registration, at the same time proving the ongoing validity of the common law remedies. It has continued to act as a guiding rule of harmony between the statutory protection and curbing the act of consumer deception in Indian trademarks law.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading
Archive

CASE COMMENT- GOOGLE LLC V. ORACLE AMERICA INC

This Case Comment has been written by Ashu Awasthi. He is a law student at the University of Petroleum & Energy Studies, Dehradun.

ABSTRACT

In this case, the US Supreme Court issued its verdict in 2021. The case had bearings on the contours of copyright law as applied to software, especially where Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) were concerned. This case commentary examines the historical, technical, and legal perspectives of the dispute, focusing on Oracle’s contention that Google’s use of approximately 11,500 lines of Java API code constituted copyright infringement within the Android operating system. This case commentary examines the historical, technical, and legal perspectives of the dispute, focusing on Oracle’s contention that Google’s use of approximately 11,500 lines of Java API code constituted copyright infringement within the Android operating system.  Central to the case was fair use interpretation and application regarding the US Copyright Act. 

The article delves into the nature of APIs, explaining their role as functional instruments for software system interoperability and their critical function in driving innovation. The structural integrity and creativity of Oracle’s APIs on which it bases its argument for copyright protection were claimed by it. Conversely, Google argued that its use was transformational, aiming to create a new product in alignment with fair use principles. Conversely, Google argued that its use was transformational, aiming to create a new product in alignment with fair use principles. The Supreme Court ruled in a 6-2 majority in favour of Google, and asserted that the reimplementation of the Java APIs by the company was fair use. The court indicated that APIs are used to create something new, and do not implant or substitute the original. This is not merely a resolution of a decade-long litigation; it creates a transformative precedent with regard to technology innovation and the freedom of software development. 

This judgment established significant guidelines for future software copyright disputes, emphasizing that laws must adapt dynamically to balance creators’ rights with public interest and innovation. This judgment established significant guidelines for future software copyright disputes, emphasizing that laws must adapt dynamically to balance creators’ rights with public interest and innovation. The ruling does not prohibit the reuse of APIs within the ambit of fair use, which leads to a more open and shared development paradigm imperative for any growth of the digital economy.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading
Archive

BOOK REVIEW- CORPORATE DECEPTION AND LEGAL CORRUPTION: UNVEILING THE DARK SIDE OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN MURDER THE TRUTH BY DAVID ENRICH

This Book review has been written by Sakkcham Singh Parmaar. He is a law student at Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University.

ABSTRACT

Discussing the way in which corporate and political elites exploit and corrupt the justice system to exaggerate and exacerbate oppression and curtail freedom of the press, Murder the Truth: Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful (2025) by David Enrich presents a perceptive insight into the inner workings of a system that simply is not being honest with itself. New York Times, Using the Sullivan (1964) decision that introduced the actual malice standard in defamation law, Enrich demonstrates how a continuing onslaught by conservatives has aimed at overturning this judgement, and illustrates the consequences this has on democracy. Using case studies such as the repeated arguments given by Donald Trump to ease up on the law of libel and the secretly funded lawsuit against Gawker Media spearheaded by Peter Thiel, Enrich shows how libel cases gained a new role as a source of intimidation over their ability to provide justice. The book puts these developments in the context of the conservative legal movement as a whole and the generation and influence of weaponized litigation on investigative journalism. It is worth noting that an international comparison with India reveals that criminal defamation is a global issue that needs to be fought against because these laws create an atmosphere of fear, censorship and inordinate authoritarianism. Finally, Enrich cautions that repealing Sullivan would be disastrous to democratic accountability where self-regulation of the press through media oversight will completely overlap into the drive to create a culture of law mongering and censorship. His contribution can therefore be understood as both a historical and a practical alert urgently needed to protect press freedom as an essential part of democratic societies all over the world.

“It is much more about trying to get the media and other public critics to pull punches or to shut up altogether when powerful people’s interests are on the line.” 

Through an incisive examination of the growing legal and political machinery that has been brought to bear against press freedom in the United States, David Enrich’s Murder the Truth: Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful (2025) is highly relevant as it shows the organized efforts of powerful individuals and organizations to dismantle the precedent established by the U.S. Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), This set the “actual malice” standard for defamation cases involving public figures. By analyzing the potential consequences of such movements, Enrich elucidates the ominous position of the media and gives a battle cry for the protection of democracy’s very essence.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading