A patent is a kind of legal right granted by the law to an inventor or assignee for a particular invention so that the owner of it has the exclusive right to manufacture, use, or sell the invention for only a certain number of years usually 20 years from the date filed. Patents are extended to new, useful inventions, and non-obvious inventions, and patents prove to be an important element in fostering innovation, furthering research and development, and promoting competition in the market.

Patents in IPR are very instrumental in protecting and fostering creativity. Inventors are entitled to the recognition of their intellectual properties and their monetary value for work done. However, there is usually disagreement over infringement, the validity of the patent, and the licensing agreement of patents. A few cases have enormous impacts on specific industries but also contribute to an effect on worldwide patent legislation and the operating practices of giant corporations.

Some of the most important patent cases worldwide and in India are discussed along with their position in the pantheon of intellectual property.

Global Top Patent Cases

Patent disputes worldwide have had significant impacts on industries, shaping innovation, competition, and legal precedents. Global top patent cases, especially in technology and pharmaceuticals, have involved major players and set important legal standards, influencing patent law, licensing practices, and intellectual property protection worldwide.

1. Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (2011-2018)

Facts:

• Apple claims that Samsung infringed its trademark rights by copying the designs of its iPhones and iPads. Apple stated that Samsung's smartphones and tablets infringed upon several of Apple's design patents, relating to the form of the phone, screen layout, and user interface.

• The case was filed in 2011, where Apple sought $2.5 billion in damages against Samsung for copying Apple's designs and trade secrets.

Issues:

• Whether Samsung infringed Apple's patents related to design and utility.

• The validity of Apple's design patents and their application to Samsung's devices.

• The appropriate amount of damages for infringement.

Judgment:

• In 2012, the jury awarded Apple $1 billion in damages. The amount was later reduced in subsequent retrials.

• In 2018, in a long history of lawsuit and appeals, Apple and Samsung settled the case in which Samsung compensated Apple with $539 million in damages.

• The case also marked the setting of various precedents in design patents, thus underlining how design innovations should be protected in this industry.

Get to Know What are the Compulsory Licenses Provisions under Section 84 of The Patents Act 1970

2. Google Inc. v. Oracle America, Inc. (2010-2021)

Facts:

• Oracle claimed that Google infringed its patents and copyrights in using Java's APIs in the Android operating system without a license.

• The case mainly hinged on whether Java's APIs could be copyrighted and whether Google's usage of them in Android was indeed infringement.

Issues

• Whether Google's use of Java APIs in Android was a violation of Oracle's copyrights and patents

• Whether Java's APIs could be protected under copyright law.

• Whether Google's use of Java APIs was "fair use" under copyright law.

Judgment:

• In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in favor of Google, holding that its use of Java's APIs in Android was fair use under copyright law.

• This case became a landmark precedent for software patent and copyright law, especially with regard to interoperability and fair use.

Learn Which are the Inventions not Patentable under Section 3 of the Indian Patent Act

3. Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc. (2017-2019)

Facts:

• Qualcomm sued Apple for infringement of its patents on cellular technology, including modem chip patents used in iPhones.

• Qualcomm alleged that Apple refused to pay royalties for the use of Qualcomm's patents, while Apple countered by alleging that Qualcomm was charging excessive royalties for essential patents.

Issues: 

• Whether Apple's iPhones infringed Qualcomm's patents related to cellular technology.

• Whether Qualcomm's licensing practices were anti-competitive and violated antitrust laws.

• Whether Qualcomm was entitled to its requested royalty payments.

Judgment

• In 2019, Apple and Qualcomm agreed on a settlement where Apple promised to pay $4.5 billion as royalties, and the cases between them are dismissed in all.

• The case emphasized standard-essential patents and the fairness of the terms of a license under FRAND (Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory).

Step into the future of legal expertise! Join our Advanced Certification Program in Intellectual Property Law, created by The Legal School in collaboration with Khaitan & Co. Designed for fresh law graduates and professionals, this unique course boosts your legal career. Don’t miss this opportunity—enquire today to secure your spot!

Top Patent Cases in India

India has seen landmark patent cases that have gone on to shape the intellectual property scenario of the country. Issues related to patentability, compulsory licensing, and the delicate balance between public health and patent rights, especially in the pharmaceutical sector, have been addressed through these landmark cases.

1. Novartis AG v. Union of India (2013)

Facts:

• Novartis applied for a patent in India on its cancer drug Glivec (Imatinib Mesylate) by claiming a new crystalline form of the active pharmaceutical ingredient.

• The Indian Patent Office rejected the patent application by relying upon Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act which prohibits the patentability of new forms of known substances unless they show significantly enhanced efficacy.

Issues

• Novartis' new crystalline form of imatinib mesylate was patentable in India.

• Whether the application met the inventive step requirement under Indian patent law.

Judgment:

• The Supreme Court of India dismissed the patent application. It upheld the decision of the rejection of the patent application by stating that the new form of imatinib did not reflect any enhanced therapeutic efficacy. Therefore, it was impossible to grant a patent under Section 3(d).

• This ruling was crucial in guaranteeing the availability of cheap drugs and also reminded the courts that public health is a vital factor in patent law.

Know all Contents of Specifications under Section 10 of the Patents Act

2. Bayer Corporation v. Union of India (2014)

Facts:

• Bayer had a patent on Nexavar (Sorafenib), a drug to treat liver and kidney cancer.

• The Indian Patent Office issued a compulsory license to Natco Pharma, which could manufacture a generic version of Nexavar at a much lower price.

• Bayer challenged the grant of the compulsory license, arguing that it violated its exclusive patent rights.

Issues:

• Whether the Indian government had the authority to grant a compulsory license under Section 84 of the Indian Patents Act.

• Whether Bayer's patent on Nexavar was being abused by charging exorbitant prices for a life-saving drug.

Judgment:

• The Delhi High Court confirmed the compulsory license award on grounds that Bayer's price was not affordable and that Nexavar was not available in sufficient quantities in India.

• The case reaffirmed the commitment of India to public health over patent exclusivity and proved that patents can be overridden for the good of the people.

3. F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd. v. Cipla Ltd. (2008)

Facts:

• Roche sued Cipla for patent infringement of the drug Tarceva that is used to treat lung cancer.

• Cipla launched the generic version of Tarceva at a lower price, and Roche pleaded that Cipla's version was an infringement of the patent.

Issues:

• Whether the patent of Roche in respect of Tarceva was valid under Indian Patent Law.

• Whether the generic version of the drug by Cipla infringed the patent of Roche.

Judgment

• The Bombay High Court passed a judgment in favor of Cipla, deciding that Roche's patent was invalid as it was not invented.

• The case highlighted the stand of India on patents being invalid if minor modifications were done on existing products and further emphasized the role of generic competition in the pharmaceutical world.

Also, Check out Grounds & Procedure for Patent Revocation in Section 64 of Patents Act, 1970

4. Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. Union of India (2013)

Facts:

• Ajanta Pharma filed a petition challenging the rejection of its patent application for a new formulation of an existing drug.

• The case revolved around the novelty and patentability of incremental innovations in the pharmaceutical industry.

Issues:

• Whether the new formulation of the drug was novel and sufficiently inventive to be patented.

• Whether the rejection of the patent application violated the criteria for granting patents under the Indian Patents Act.

Judgment:

• The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) ruled that the formulation lacked novelty and did not meet the patentability criteria.

• The case reinforced the principle that incremental innovations without substantial improvements in therapeutic efficacy would not qualify for patent protection in India.

Know the Key Differences between Process & Product Patents

5. Merck Sharp & Dohme Co. v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2017)

Facts:

• Merck sued Glenmark for infringing its patent on Ritonavir, an antiretroviral drug used in the treatment of HIV/AIDS.

• Glenmark launched a generic version of Ritonavir, which Merck claimed infringed its patent.

Issues:

• Whether Glenmark's generic version of Ritonavir infringed Merck's patent.

• Whether Merck's patent was valid and whether it should be enforced.

Judgment:

• The Delhi High Court ruled in favour of Merck, granting an injunction against Glenmark's sale of its generic version of Ritonavir.

• The court reinforced the role of patent protection for innovative pharmaceutical products, underlining the role of patents in promoting drug development.

Also, Check out What is Patent Cost In India

Summing Up

These landmark patent cases reflect the evolving landscape of patent law, particularly in technology and pharmaceuticals. Globally, cases like Apple v. Samsung and Google v. Oracle highlight the significance of design and software patents, while in India, cases like Novartis v. Union of India and Bayer v. Natco emphasize the balance between protecting intellectual property rights and ensuring public access to affordable medicines.

Both of the sets of cases demonstrate the central role that patents play in encouraging innovation but also bring forth critical questions about competition, accessibility, and fairness in the marketplace.

Top Patent Cases: FAQs

Q1. What is a patent?

A patent is a legal right given to an inventor that he exclusively has the right to make, use, or sell his invention for a short period of time.

Q2. What is patent infringement?

Patent infringement occurs when a person uses or sells a patented invention without permission from the owner of the patent.

Q3. How long does a patent last?

A patent generally lasts for 20 years from the date of filing.

Q4. What did the Delhi High Court decide in Ajanta Pharma v. Union of India?

The court upheld the rejection of Ajanta Pharma’s patent application, emphasizing the lack of novelty in the formulation.

Q5. How are patent cases resolved?

Patent cases are resolved either through litigation in court or a settlement agreement between the parties.