Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Contribution of Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR) in IPR Research: A View through the Articles Published in the First Decade of Twenty-First Century (2005–2009) — III


Affiliations
1 Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat- 131 001, Haryana, India., India
2 CSIR–National Institute of Science, Communication and Policy Research(CSIR-NIScPR), New Delhi- 110012, India., India
 

This Paper seeks to review the articles published in the Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR) in the second half of the first decade of the twenty-first century from Volume 10 (1) (2005) to Volume 14 (6) (2009). During this period, a total of seven post-independent enacted IP legislations were in force in the country. This Paper seeks to review the articles published in JIPR year-wise during the decade. Paper attempts to identify: (i) total number of issues published; (ii) total number of articles published; (iii) total number of contributions made by the Indian and foreign scholars; (iv) total number of sole and joint publications; (v) publishing style of JIPR; and (vi) areas of IP covered in each volume. A review ofarticles published during this period reveals that on an average, a total of 44 articles have been published in each volume. In the total articles published between 1996–2009, the articles published during the second half of the first decade of 21 st century constitutes 52 percent (220 articles) compared to 31.20 percent published between 2000–2004 (132 articles)and 16.78 percent between 1996–1999 (71 papers). JIPR through an open-access platform has provided an opportunity tothe IP scholars to publish their writings addressing the gaps in the areas of IP. In the end, Paper develops an argument that JIPR has significantly contributed in the development of IP by disseminating IP information and knowledge, and also in creating IP knowledge and awareness.

Keywords

JIPR, IP statutes, Scholars, CSIR-NIScPR, CSIR-NISCAIR, IP Awareness, Articles, Copyright, Patents, Trade Marks, Geographical Indications, Trade Secrets, Industrial Design, Design, Integrated Circuit, Plant Varieties, TRIPS, WIPO, GATT, IPRs, Treaties, Agreement, Research, Case Law Development, Amendments, Review, IP Publications, Publici Juris, Dissemination of Knowledge, Creation of New Knowledge, First Decade, Twenty-first Century.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Malik K &Raza A, Contribution of Journal of Intellectual Property Rights(JIPR) in IPR research: A View through the Articles Published in the Last Decade of Twentieth-Century (1996–1999) — I,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 28 (1) (2023) 68–78.
  • Malik K & Raza A, Contribution of Journal of Intellectual Property Rights(JIPR) in IPR research: A View through the Articles Published in the First Decade of Twenty-First Century (2000–2004) — II,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 28 (2) (2023) 171–185.
  • Krishnan A, Testing for copyright protection and infringement in Non-Literal, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (1) (2005) 9–20.
  • Singh D V & Kumar P, Photocopying of copyrighted works for educational purposes: Does it constitute Fair Use?, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (1) (2005) 21–33.
  • Burrone E, Intellectual property rights and innovation in SMEs in OECD countries, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (1) (2005) 34–43.
  • Chawla H S, Patenting ofbiological material and biotechnology, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (1) (2005) 45–51.
  • Ninan S, Sharma A &Ananthan P S, Intellectual property rights in Fisheries Sector,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (1) (2005) 52–58.
  • Karki M M S, Personal data privacy and intellectual property, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (1) (2005) 59– 63.The word “Property” is missing from the title of the paper as mentioned on JIPRwebpage but is mentioned in the article.
  • Pal S K, Madhukar A & Mitra A, Patenting in micromagnetic sensors, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (2) (2005) 99–105.
  • Tulzapurkar V, Remix and Copyright Law, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (2) (2005) 106–111.
  • New York Times Co v Tasini59 USPQ2D 1001/533 US 433 (2001).
  • Kumar H, Employer’s Copyright vis-à-visauthor’s right: An unresolved legal dilemma, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (2) (2005) 112–118.
  • Bhattacharjee S & Rao G, The broadening horizons of Trademark Law -Registrability ofsmell, sports merchandise and building designs as trademarks, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (2) (2005) 119–126.
  • Torremans P L C, Trademark Law: Is Europe moving towards an unduly wide approach for anyone to follow the example?Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (2) (2005) 127–132.
  • Geller P E, International intellectual property, conflicts of laws, and internet remedies, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (2) (2005) 133–140.
  • Baechtold P & Miyamoto T, International Patent Law Harmonization—A search for the right balance, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (3) (2005) 177–187.
  • Ganley P, The Internet, creativity and copyright incentives, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (3) (2005) 188–197.
  • Shin J & Park Y, Generation and application of Patent Claim Map: Text mining and (Network Analysis), Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (3) (2005) 198–205. The word “Property” is missing from the title of the paper as mentioned on the JIPR webpage but is mentioned in the article.
  • Aoki R, Intellectual Property and Consortium Standard Patent Pools, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (3) (2005) 206–213.
  • Mehlwal G,Intellectual property licensing: Discovering its facets, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (3) (2005) 214–220.
  • Phadnis R & Hirwani R R, Patent analysis as a tool for research planning: Case study, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10(3) (2005) 221–231.
  • Raj R S P, Inventive step or non-obviousness of an invention, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (3) (2005) 232–234.
  • Pillai M, The Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 and TRIPS compliance–A critique, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (3) (2005) 235–238.
  • Chandran S, Roy A and Jain L,Implications of New Patent Regime on Indian Pharmaceutical industry: Challenges and opportunities, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (4) (2005) 269–280.
  • Mendonca S, Large innovating firms and patent management: Challenges for SMEs’ Managers and IP Officials in catching-up economies, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (4) (2005) 281–286.
  • Zekos G I G, Discrepancies in biotechnology/chemical patenting, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (4) (2005) 287–299.
  • Narasani A K & Kankanala K C, Testing parameters for software patentability, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (4) (2005) 300–307.
  • Dwivedi A & Saroha M, Copyright Laws as a means of extending protection to expressions of folklore, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (4) (2005) 308–314.
  • Mittal R and Singh G, Patenting activities in agriculture from India, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (4) (2005) 315–320.
  • Gandhi G, IPR and India – A viewpoint, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 359–360.
  • Swenson S W, Role of collaborations, systems, and the soul in IP and innovation, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 361–368.
  • Saha R, Capacity building inmanagement of intellectual property rights- A case of publicly funded institutions, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 369–375.
  • Wang B, Intellectual property management and value-added strategy of the Industrial Technology Research Institute, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 376–381.
  • Represa-Sánchez D, Encouraging protection of public research results in Spain, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 382–388.
  • Goddar H, Making Industry-University interactions work - Model agreements in Germany , Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 389–393.
  • Tansinsin L G, Transfer of technology with intellectual property rights (IPR)—The Philippine experience, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 394–398.
  • Hyndman K G, Gruskin S M & Iyer C S, Technology transfer: What India can learn from the United States, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 399–405.
  • Gupta R K, Valorization of intellectual property from Publicly Funded Organizations: A case study of the Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR), India, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 406–412.
  • Bhattacharya P, Technology transfer from a Technical University: A case study of IIT Delhi, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 413–416.
  • Bhuvaneshwar G S and Ranjit D, Medical device development – A novel experience in patenting and technology transfer, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 417–420.
  • Peters R, Technology licensing: A win-win solution in the intellectual economy, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 421–425.
  • Bawa R, Bawa S R & Maebius S B, The Nanotechnology Patent ‘Gold Rush’ , Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 426–433.
  • Kumar P R & Prakash V, Value addition to agricultural resources – The IPR angle, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 434–440.
  • Pushpangadan P, Value addition and commercialization of biodiversity and associated traditional knowledge in the context of the Intellectual Property Regime, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (5) (2005) 441–453.
  • Laik K, Role of intellectual property in economic growth, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (6) (2005) 465–473.
  • Gupta A, Integrated circuits and intellectual property rights in India, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (6) (2005) 474–479.
  • Tiwari A, Passing off and the Law on ‘Trade Dress’ protection: Reflections on Colgatev Anchor, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (6) (2005) 480–490.
  • 2003 (27) PTC 428 (Del).
  • Gupta S, Digital alteration of photographs and intellectual property rights, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (6) (2005) 491–498.
  • Karki M M S, Nontraditional areas of intellectual property protection: Colour, sound, taste, smell, shape, slogan and trade dress, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10 (6) (2005) 499–506.
  • Cullet P, Human rights, knowledgeand intellectual property protection, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (1) (2006) 7–14
  • Boswoth D, Conceptual issues of global counterfeiting on products and services, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (1) (2006) 15–21.
  • Verma S K, Financing of intellectual property: Developing countries’ context, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (1) (2006) 22–32.
  • Tiwari A & Ranjan S S, Proprietary rights or common property? — The dilemmas of copyright protection of Case-Law reporters, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (1) (2006) 33–42.
  • Singhania A, Copyright Laws in India and maintenance of a welfare state, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (1) (2006) 43–52.
  • Pillai M, Kumar S, Kumar R & Agarwal P, India’s Tryst with TRIPS continues!Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (1) (2006) 53–56.
  • Saha T K & Bharti N, Beyond wines and spirits: Developing countries’ GI Products and their potential in WTO Regime with special reference to India, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (2) (2006) 89–97.
  • Kumar J, Intellectual property securitization: How far possible and effective, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (2) (2006) 98–102.
  • Gibson J, Patenting lives—Life patents, culture and development, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (2) (2006) 103–112.
  • Basheer S, Taming of the Flu: Working through the Tamiflu patents in India, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (2) (2006) 113–124.
  • Dalal P, Data Protection Law in India: The TRIPS perspective, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (2) (2006) 125–131.
  • Rana R, Indigenous culture and intellectual property rights, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (2) (2006) 132–139.
  • Maggon H, Legal Protection ofDatabases: An Indian Perspective, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (2) (2006) 140–144.
  • Ghosh A, Business Method Patents: The road ahead, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (3) (2006) 175–184.
  • Nair L, The Melton Mowbray Pork Pie Case: Lessons for India?, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (3) (2006) 185–191.
  • Roy A G, Protection of intellectual property in the form of trade secrets, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (3) (2006) 192–200.
  • Sahay S, Piracy of trade dress and the Law of Passing off: National and international perspective, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (3) (2006) 201–206.
  • Soam S K & Rashmi H B, Some reflections on Patent Search: A case study of medicinal plants of India, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (3) (2006) 207–213.
  • Moerman L, Accounting for intellectual property: Inconsistencies and challenges, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (4) (2006) 243–248.
  • Mangàni A, An economic analysisof rise of service marks, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (4) (2006) 249– 259.
  • Hu R, Huang J, Pray C and Huang J, The determinants of Plant Variety Protection Applications in China, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (4) (2006) 260–268.
  • Puttitanum T, Intellectual property rights and multinational firms’ modes of entry, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (4) (2006) 269–273.
  • Banerjee S, Transborder reputation, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (4) (2006) 274–279.
  • Thomas Z, IP Case Law Studies, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (4) (2006) 280–284.
  • Majumdar A, Sadhu S and Majumdar S, The requirement of graphical representability for non-conventional trademarks, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (5) (2006) 313– 317.
  • Metro-Goldwyn-Mayerv Grokster Ltd 125 S Ct 2764 (2005).
  • Jha S andJha S, An analysis of the Theory of Contributory Infringement, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (5) (2006) 318–325.
  • Kumar R & Ramesh R, IPR, plagiarism and the text data security pyramid, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (5) (2006) 326–329.
  • Jain K and Sharma V, Intellectual Property Management System: An organizational perspective, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (5) (2006) 330–333.
  • Basheer S, Block me not: How “essential” are patented genes, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (5) (2006) 334–358.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (5) (2006) 359–363.
  • Pitchfork E, The protection of confidential information, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (5) (2006) 364– 367.
  • Kumar A, Mohanty P & Nandakumar R, Legal protection of trade secrets: Towards a codified regime, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (6) (2006) 397–408.
  • Shukla U, Comparative advertising and product disparagement vis-à-visTrademark Law, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (6) (2006) 409–414.
  • Pareek A & Majumdar A, Protection of celebrity rights – The problems and the solutions, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (6) (2006) 415–424.
  • Lawrence H, Bootlegging – Its impact on sound recording industry and legal responses, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (6) (2006) 424–429.
  • Chaudhuri S K & Dutta C, Impacts of a patent on Euryale ferox on biodiversity at micro level: A case study, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (6) (2006) 430–435.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 11 (6) (2006) 436–442.
  • Kardam K S, Patenting in the emerging fields of technology, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 15–29.
  • Whittaker P, Human embryonic stem cell patents: A European perspective, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 30–37.
  • Gibson J, The discovery of invention: Gene patents and the question of patentability, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 38–44.
  • Lakshmikumaran M, Patenting of genetic inventions, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 45–56.
  • Singh A, Das S and WilsonN, Genomics and IP: An overview, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 57–71.
  • Harmon S H E, Biotech innovation and patenting in the developing world: China – A giant among nations?Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 72–85.
  • Boettiger S & Bennett A, PIPRA: A resource for collaborative intellectualproperty management in agriculture, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 86–91.
  • Kowalski S, rational risk/benefit analysis of genetically modified crops, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 92–103.
  • Kankanala K C, Diagnostic method patent model patent incentives and socio-ethical concerns, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 104–110.
  • Shand H & Wetter K J, Trends in intellectual property and nanotechnology: Implications, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 111–117.
  • Hennessey W O, What’s new? Innovating the teaching of Innovation Law, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 118–128.
  • Field T G Jr, Patent systems: More easily faulted than fixed, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 129–141.
  • Cannady C & Vega M I, R&D networks and intellectual property hubs: A strategy for developing countries to participate in knowledge led growth, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 142–153.
  • Kochupillai M & Smith M A, Patent valuation with consideration for emerging technologies, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 154–164.
  • Unni V K, What is in a name: Viewing patent infringement through the prism of Anglo-American Doctrines, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12(1) (2007) 165–175.
  • Ghosh R A, IPR, Law and FLOSS: Building a protected common, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 176–182.
  • Rines R H, Should India and Other countries adopt the American ‘Business Methods’ class of patents?Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (1) (2007) 183–184.
  • Raju K D, Is the future of software development in open source,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (2) (2007) 199–211.
  • Lukose L P, Rationale and prospects of the protection of Geographical Indication: An inquiry, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (2) (2007) 212–223.
  • Jain S and Tripathy S, Intellectual property and Competition Laws: Jural correlatives, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12(2) (2007) 224–235.
  • Kahandawaarachchi T, A study of Indian and US Trademark Law relating to the effect of ‘Non-Use’ of a trademark, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (2) (2007) 236– 243.
  • Laik K & Raj R, Changing dynamics of the Patent Regime: An economic understanding, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (2) (2007) 244–250.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (2) (2007) 251–256.
  • Ghosh A & Kabir D C, Balance of competition and Intellectual Property Laws in the Indian pharmaceutical sector, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (3) (2007) 293–302.
  • Ganguly N, Copyleft: An alternative to copyright in computer software and beyond, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (3) (2007) 303–313.
  • Festo Corp vShokestsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co Ltd, 535US 722 (2002).
  • Patodia D, Jain S & Shukla U,Doctrine of Equivalents: Scope & limitations, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (3) (2007) 314–329.
  • Chawla H S, Managing Intellectual property rights for better transfer and commercialization of agricultural technologies, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (3) (2007) 330–340.
  • Kumar S K, The current Indian Patent Regime and the scope of protection in agricultural biotechnology: Some issues and considerations, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12(3) (2007) 341–348.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (3) (2007) 349–353.
  • Singh H, Plant Variety Protection and food security: Lessons for developing countries, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (4) (2007) 391–399.
  • Sengupta A, Parallel imports in the pharmaceutical sector: Must India be more liberal?Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (4) (2007) 400–409.
  • Mathur T, Application of Doctrine of Equivalents in patent infringement disputes, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (4) (2007) 410–421.
  • Gupta A, Protection of databases in India: Copyright termination Sui Generisconception, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (4) (2007) 422–427.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12(4) (2007) 428–433.
  • Guennif S & Lalitha N, TRIPS Plus Agreements and issues in access to medicines in developing countries, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (5) (2007) 471–479. Lalitha N, an Indian author, her name is not mentioned on the web but in mentioned in the article.
  • Vibhaw N and Venkataraman A, Recording that Different Version – An Indian Raga, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (5) (2007) 480–487.
  • Bhadra S & Majumdar A, Anton Piller Order in UK and its Possible Implications in India, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (5) (2007) 488–496.
  • Masroof A, The registrability of unconventional trademarks in India and Sri Lanka: A comparative analysis, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (5) (2007) 497–506.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (5) (2007) 507–515.
  • Kahandawaarachchi T, Liability of internet service providers for third party online copyright infringement: A study of the US and Indian Laws, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (6) (2007) 553–561.
  • Roberts G, Modern patenting – Quantity and quality, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (6) (2007) 562–571.
  • Reddy J A & Chatterjee S, A critique of the Indian Law and approach towards protection of Geographical Indications with specific reference to genericide, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (6) (2007) 572–580.
  • Gopalan R & Sivakumar S, Keeping Cashmere in Kashmir- The interface between GI and TK, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (6) (2007) 581–588.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 12 (6) (2007) 589–597.
  • Pareek A & Singh S, Concept of obviousness: Scenario post KSR Internationalv Teleflex Inc,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (1) (2008) 7–18.
  • Mittal R & Aishwarya S, Comparative advertising: An eye for an eye making the consumers blind,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (1) (2008) 19–27.
  • Janodia M D, Sreedhar D, LigadeV S, Pise A and Udupa N, Facets of technology transfer: A perspective of pharmaceutical industry,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (1) (2008) 28–34.
  • Saha S & Keshri S, Challenges to copyrightable work in cyberspace,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (1) (2008) 35–42.
  • Mishra N, Registration of non-traditional trademarks, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (1) (2008) 43–50.
  • Kochhar S, Institutions and capacity building for the evolution of IPR Regime in India: Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (1) (2008) 51–56.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (1) (2008) 57–64.
  • Ramanujan A, Reflections on the Indian accession to the Madrid Protocol,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (2) (2008) 111–117.
  • Patel M and Saha S, Trademark issues in Digital Era,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (2) (2008) 118–128.
  • Kumar A, Towards patentability of essentially biological processes,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (2) (2008) 129–138.
  • Maheshwari V & Bhatnagar P, Small scale industries and IP management: Need to recognize intellectual assets,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (2) (2008) 139–144.
  • Mitra S, Patent & Food Security – Opening the Pandora’s Box,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (2) (2008) 145–151.
  • Kochhar S, Institutions and capacity building for the evolution of intellectual property rights regime in India: II — Ownership and management issues in agricultural research * ,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (2) (2008) 152–156.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (2) (2008) 157–164.
  • Deepak J S, Protection of traditional handicrafts under Indian Intellectual Property Laws,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13(3) (2008) 197–207.
  • Harshwardhan K S, Trade secrets: A secret still to unveil, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (3) (2008) 208–217.
  • Chindalia S, Open source software: The future ahead,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (3) (2008) 218–224.
  • Chakravarthy S, Shukla G Malla S and Suresh C P, Farmers’ rights in conserving plant biodiversity with special reference to North-East India,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (3) (2008) 225–233.
  • Kumar J, Insurance coverage in intellectual property litigation,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (3) (2008) 234–238.
  • Kochhar S, Institutions and capacity building for the evolution of intellectual property rights regime in India: III– Conformity and enforcement issues,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (3) (2008) 239–244.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (3) (2008) 245–252.
  • Bergstra J A and Klint P, The software invention cube: A classification scheme for software inventions,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (4) (2008) 293–300.
  • Rai R K, Battling with TRIPS: Emerging firm strategies of Indian pharmaceutical industry Post-TRIPS,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (4) (2008) 301–317.
  • Gupta V K, India: IPR and the national security, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13(4) (2008) 318–325.
  • Venkataraman K and Latha S S, Intellectual property rights, traditional knowledge and biodiversity of India,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13(4) (2008) 326–335.
  • Kochhar S, Institutions and capacity building for the evolution of intellectual property rights regime in India: IV– Identification and disclosure of IP products for their IPR protection in plants and animals,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (4) (2008) 336–343.
  • Thomas Zakir, IP Case Law Developments,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (4) (2008) 344–350.
  • Singh A, Patent infringement: How to minimize the risk, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (4) (2008) 351–353.
  • Gopalakrishnan N S, TRIPS Agreement and public health: An overview of international issues,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 395–400.
  • Lalitha N, Doha Declaration and public health issues, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 401–413.
  • Damodaran A D, Indian Patent Law in the post-TRIPS decade: S&T Policy appraisal,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 414–423.
  • Khader F A, Transcending differences: The challenge for pharmaceuticals in the Post-TRIPS Indian Patent Regime, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 424–431.
  • Nair G G, Impact of TRIPS on Indian pharmaceutical industry,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 432–441.
  • Janodia M D, Chauhan A, Hakak S M, Sreedhar D, Ligade V S & Udupa N, Data exclusivity provisions in India: Impact on public health,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 442–446.
  • Kuanpoth J, Appropriate Patent Rules in developing countries - Some deliberations based on Thai Legislation, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 447–455.
  • Nair M D, Compromising TRIPS: Brazil’s approach to tackle the HIV/AIDS imbroglio,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 456–463.
  • Mathur H, Compulsory licensing under Section 92A: Issues and concerns,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 462–472.
  • Pohl M, How to control the United States Pharmaceutical API Market using patents on new synthetic intermediate compounds,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 473–479.
  • Vivekanandan V C, Transplanting Bayh-Dole Act- Issues at stake,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 480–485.
  • Basheer S andKochupillai M, ‘Exhausting’ patent rights in India: Parallel imports and TRIPS compliance,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 486–497.
  • Ohly D C, What’s ‘new’? - Isn’t it obvious?,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 498–508.
  • Damodaran A, Traditional knowledge, intellectual property rights and biodiversity conservation: Critical issues and key challenges,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 509–513.
  • Ragavan S, New paradigms for protection of biodiversity, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 514–522.
  • Thomas Zakir, Legal issues in branding medicinal products, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 523–535.
  • Kochhar S, Institutions and capacity building for the evolution of intellectual property rights regime in India: V – Analysis of review of TRIPS Agreement and R&D prospect in Indian agriculture under IPR Regime,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (5) (2008) 536–547.
  • Raju K D, Intellectual property taxation: Need for a comprehensive Policy and Law in India,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (6) (2008) 563–573.
  • Ambast S, Protecting Performers’ Rights: Does India need law reform?Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (6) (2008) 574–582.
  • Singh S, Insight into the nature of offence of copyright infringement,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (6) (2008) 583–589.
  • Samaddar S G & Chaudhary B D, Practical insights into intellectual property strategy for a Technical Institute,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (6) (2008) 590–600.
  • Bele M H & Derle D V, Analysis of patents pertaining to super disintegrants used in tablet manufacturing,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (6) (2008) 601–604.
  • Kochhar S, Institutions and capacity building for the evolution of intellectual property rights regime in India: VI – Obligations and opportunities in handling plant varieties and agricultural biotechnology,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (6) (2008) 605–611.
  • Thomas Z, IP Case Law developments,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 13 (6) (2008) 612–621.
  • Nagori B P and Mathur V, Basics of writing patent non-infringement and freedom-to-operate opinions,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (1) (2009) 7–13.
  • Jain S, Parallel imports and trademark Law,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (1) (2009) 14–27.
  • Ramanujan A, Methodology ofclaim construction after Phillipsv AWH Corp: The need for an alternative approach, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (1) (2009) 28–45.
  • 376 F.3d 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
  • Gopalan R, Bioinformatics: Scope of intellectual property protection,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (1) (2009) 46–51.
  • Mukherjee U, Currency patents - The anticipated bust of an economy,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (1) (2009) 52–62.
  • Hidalgo A, Analysis of the commercial use of Spanish inventions protected by patents between 1996 and 2006,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (1) (2009) 63–69.
  • Shirwaikar P, Fashion copying and design of the Law, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (2) (2009) 113–121.
  • Demunshi Y andChugh A, Patenting trends in marine bioprospecting based pharmaceutical sector,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (2) (2009) 122–130.
  • Saha S, Patenting of internet and e-commerce: An international view,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (2) (2009) 131–141.
  • Saha Shridhar M, Jain S K & Gautam V, Patent activity by patent agents in India,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (2) (2009) 142–148.
  • Suman Y, Nishy P & Gupta V K, Trends in IT patents filed from India: An analysis,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (2) (2009) 149–152.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (2) (2009) 153–163.
  • Gupta V K, Indian patents output in nanotechnology,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (2) (2009) 164–165.
  • Nair M D, TRIPS, WTO and IPR - Impact on developing countries,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (2) (2009) 166–167.
  • Parvin M R, Patentability of plants: Technical and legal aspects,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (3) (2009) 203–213.
  • Bhat P I, The role of collective bodies in protection of intellectual property rights in India,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (3) (2009) 214–225.
  • Liu W, Establishing a safeguard system for intellectual property protection for Chinese Private Enterprises,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (3) (2009) 226–235.
  • Shukla N & Sangal T, Generic drug industry in India: The counterfeit spin,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (3) (2009) 236–240.
  • Nanda N, Diffusion of climate friendly technologies: Can compulsory licensing help?Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (3) (2009) 241–246.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (3) (2009) 247–257.
  • Nair M D, TRIPS, WTO and IPR - Debate on evergreening of patents and IPA 2005,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (3) (2009) 258–259.
  • Bansal I S, Sahu D, Bakshi G and Singh S, Evergreening – A controversial issue in pharma milieu,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (4) (2009) 299–306.
  • Gupta M S, Sufficiency of disclosure in patent specification, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (4) (2009) 307–316.
  • Khanna S R Vinoth and Ravindran S, Benefits of the London Agreement (2000) for Indian patent applicants,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (4) (2009) 317–320.
  • Mishra P and Dutta A, Striking a balance between liability of internet service providers and protection of copyright over the internet: A need of the hour,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (4) (2009) 321–329.
  • Lakshmi V Vijay and Patro A M, Intellectual property protection at border,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (4) (2009) 330–339.
  • Sinha B, Joshi H and Ghosh P K, Challenges in creation and management of knowledge capitalin Technical Educational Institutions,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (4) (2009) 340–345.
  • Nair M D, TRIPS, WTO and IPR - How effective is the dispute settlement process?Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (4) (2009) 346–348.
  • Kant A, Section 3(d): ‘New’ Indian perspective,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (5) (2009) 385–396.
  • Tomar V, Trademark licensing & franchising: Trends in transfer of rights,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (5) (2009) 397–404.
  • Rai R K, The TRIPS Article 23 extension stalemate continues: A way-ahead for the developing countries,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (5) (2009) 405–422.
  • Baruah A, Patent specification: Engineering the technical output of novel invention,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (5) (2009) 423–431.
  • Janodia M D, Rso J V, Pandey S, Sreedhar D, Ligade V S and Udupa N, Impact ofpatents on Indian Pharma Industry’s growth and competency: A viewpoint of Pharmaceutical Companies in India,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (5) (2009) 432–436.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (5) (2009) 437–445.
  • Nair M D, TRIPS, WTO and IPR – DOHA Round & public health,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (5) (2009) 446–447.
  • Saha T K, War on words in cyberspace- Legal constraints and conflicts between rights of privacy and freedom of speech,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (6) (2009) 489–500.
  • Srihari Y, Padmajja S and Rao S Srinivasa, Implications of Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act (DPCPTRA) on Indian Pharma Industry,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (6) (2009) 501–512.
  • Chakravarthy S, Importance of Assignment Agreements under Intellectual Property Laws in India,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (6) (2009) 513–522.
  • The Indian Contract Act, 1872 (Act 9 of 1972).
  • The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (Act 2 of 1899).
  • Sharma A, Indian perspective of fair dealing under Copyright Law: Lex Lata or Lex Ferenda?,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (6) (2009) 523–531.
  • Thomas Z, IP CaseLaw Developments,Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (6) (2009) 532–541.
  • Nair M D, TRIPS, WTO and IPR - How far have we gone with the DOHA Round?, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 (6) (2009) 542–543.

Abstract Views: 227

PDF Views: 128




  • Contribution of Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR) in IPR Research: A View through the Articles Published in the First Decade of Twenty-First Century (2005–2009) — III

Abstract Views: 227  |  PDF Views: 128

Authors

Aqa Raza
Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat- 131 001, Haryana, India., India
Kanika Malik
CSIR–National Institute of Science, Communication and Policy Research(CSIR-NIScPR), New Delhi- 110012, India., India

Abstract


This Paper seeks to review the articles published in the Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR) in the second half of the first decade of the twenty-first century from Volume 10 (1) (2005) to Volume 14 (6) (2009). During this period, a total of seven post-independent enacted IP legislations were in force in the country. This Paper seeks to review the articles published in JIPR year-wise during the decade. Paper attempts to identify: (i) total number of issues published; (ii) total number of articles published; (iii) total number of contributions made by the Indian and foreign scholars; (iv) total number of sole and joint publications; (v) publishing style of JIPR; and (vi) areas of IP covered in each volume. A review ofarticles published during this period reveals that on an average, a total of 44 articles have been published in each volume. In the total articles published between 1996–2009, the articles published during the second half of the first decade of 21 st century constitutes 52 percent (220 articles) compared to 31.20 percent published between 2000–2004 (132 articles)and 16.78 percent between 1996–1999 (71 papers). JIPR through an open-access platform has provided an opportunity tothe IP scholars to publish their writings addressing the gaps in the areas of IP. In the end, Paper develops an argument that JIPR has significantly contributed in the development of IP by disseminating IP information and knowledge, and also in creating IP knowledge and awareness.

Keywords


JIPR, IP statutes, Scholars, CSIR-NIScPR, CSIR-NISCAIR, IP Awareness, Articles, Copyright, Patents, Trade Marks, Geographical Indications, Trade Secrets, Industrial Design, Design, Integrated Circuit, Plant Varieties, TRIPS, WIPO, GATT, IPRs, Treaties, Agreement, Research, Case Law Development, Amendments, Review, IP Publications, Publici Juris, Dissemination of Knowledge, Creation of New Knowledge, First Decade, Twenty-first Century.

References