Business Economics & Services Team (BEST)
Ericsson vs Xiaomi : Advantage Ericson
Ericsson called Chinese telecom equipment manufacturer Xiaomi copy cat for the former alleges that the latter has copied its technology while launching the smart phones in India in July this year. Going by Ericsson's assertion Delhi High Court has stopped Xiaomi India and its e-commerce outfit Flipkart to stop all imports of the smart phone till the case is heard in February 2015. Undoubtedly, it a set back to Xiaomi who is bullish about Indian market and sold 800,000 smart phone pieces in the fiercely competitive Indian market riding on the back of newcomer in the e-commerce- Flipkart. It may be noted that Xiaomi technologies India, the 1ndian subsidiary of the Chinese telecom behemoth sells the equipment only through the net operated by Flipkart.
The recent development is seen as a major case being handled by Indian courts relating to violation of intellectual property rights (IPR). Incidentally, recently the same court has decreed in an interim order the Indian indigenous smart phone manufacturer -Micromax- to pay one percent royalty to Ericsson for using its technology.
What does these cases indicate?
1. Indian IPR regime is coming of age, though it may have to go a long way to meet the aspirations of the foreign investors.
2. The Courts in India are not allowing such cases to drift for long time since delay will shake the confidence of the foreign investors.
3. Higher judiciary is increasingly getting oriented in the nuts and bolts of the IPR rules and regulations, which are of relatively recent origin in India.
4. There is an increasing awareness in the Indian political administration to strictly enforce the IPR regulations since elsewhere in the world Indian patents are violated/ compromised leading to heavy loss of revenue to Indian manufacturers.
For more information and detailed reports/ studies on the subject, please contact jthac1234@gmail.com,jthac1234@yahoo.com. Mobile: 09810516770
0 comments:
Post a Comment