<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1983 (5) TMI 261 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177822</link>
    <description>The Designs Act, 1911 protects only designs that are new or original and not previously published in India. Publication means disclosure to the public so that the design is no longer secret. Applying an ocular comparison, the Court found that the registered matchbox design had already been disclosed in earlier patent material, imported foreign matchboxes and magazine publications, all showing the same rectangular pattern with diamond-shaped spots. The alleged grooves and projections were treated as functional features and not the protectable novelty of the design. The design was therefore liable to cancellation for prior publication and lack of novelty or originality.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:58:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=413614" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (5) TMI 261 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177822</link>
      <description>The Designs Act, 1911 protects only designs that are new or original and not previously published in India. Publication means disclosure to the public so that the design is no longer secret. Applying an ocular comparison, the Court found that the registered matchbox design had already been disclosed in earlier patent material, imported foreign matchboxes and magazine publications, all showing the same rectangular pattern with diamond-shaped spots. The alleged grooves and projections were treated as functional features and not the protectable novelty of the design. The design was therefore liable to cancellation for prior publication and lack of novelty or originality.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177822</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>