Moot Proposition

INTRA-UNIVERSITY INTELECTUAL PROPERTY LAW
MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
HOSTED BY THE MOOT COURT ASSOCIATION OF

THE SCHOOL OF EXCELLENCE IN LAW,
THE TAMIL NADU DR. AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY,
CHENNAI.
9th August, 2023 to 12th August, 2023

INTRA-UNIVERSITY INTELECTUAL PROPERTY LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MOOT PROPOSITION
Mr. Vikram Vedha

v.
School of Excellence in Food Sciences
1. After years of struggle and agitation, the Republic of Pushpa finally attained
freedom on 15th August, 1947. Subsequently, Mr. Bahubali and other prolific
leaders of the Nation came together to draft the world’s most extensive
Constitution. This Constitution granted necessary powers to the Parliament of
Pushpa to make laws on certain subject matters. Making use of such powers, the
Parliament passed laws relating to Intellectual Property Rights.
2. In the year 1957, the Parliament consolidated all laws relating to Copyright under
the Copyrights Act, 1957. This was soon followed by The Patents Act, 1970.
This Patents Act clearly enunciated that “a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic
work or any other aesthetic creation whatsoever including cinematographic
works and television productions” were not inventions and thereby, not
patentable.
3. In the same year, a University named School of Excellence in Food Sciences

was started in a metropolitan city in Republic of Pushpa. This University’s vision
was to become the ‘The first choice for Food Sciences in the Republic of
Pushpa’. With advancing times, the University regularly revamped its education
syllabus as well.
4. To keep up with changing times, the University introduced a clause of

‘Compulsory Thesis Presentation’ in order to graduate from the University. Each
student in their final semester had to present a unique thesis under the guidance
of their Professor before an externaljury. The external jury should have awarded
them atleast 50% marks for them to successfully pass this component.
2|Page
Moot Court Association
5. Owing to the above regime, Mr. Vikram Vedha also had to compulsorily present
a thesis. Mr. Vikram Vedha after consultation with his Professor, chose to
perform a thesis on ‘Making of cottage cheese with almond milk and soymilk’.
Since, the Government of Pushpa had declared lockdown due to the COVID-19
pandemic, Mr. Vedha had to use his own resources to perform the thesis. After
multiple failed attempts, Mr. Vedha was finally successful in making cottage
cheese out of soymilk and almond milk. He then sent the sample to a nearby lab
to get it tested for its nutritional value. He then submitted his thesis and the lab
test reports to his University in order to complete his graduation.
6. Mr. Kattappa was the external examiner for Mr. Vedha’s thesis presentation.
Impressed by the unique idea and research, Mr. Kattappa awarded him 47 marks
out of 50, making him the highest scorer among his peers. Soon after this, Mr.
Vedha cleared his final semester examinations and graduated from School of
Excellence in Food Sciences.
7. One year later, Mr. Vikram Vedha was shocked to find that his University had
used his thesis to apply for a patent in Australia. The Australian Patent Office
had granted the patent in favour of the University without examination under the
category of ‘innovation patent’. The University had used some of the lines from
Mr. Vedha’s thesis verbatim and had blatantly copied his pictures too. Not only
this, they had added his name and names of two other Professors as co-inventors
in the said patent. Mr. Vedha was beyond surprised as neither of these Professors
had actually helped him curate the idea behind his thesis.
8. Hurriedly, Mr. Vikram Vedha contacted Professor Sivaji, the Professor who had
guided him in the thesis. Professor Sivaji was also named as one of the co-
inventors in the patent filed before the Australian Patent Authorities. Professor
Sivaji explained to Mr. Vedha that they had reworked on his idea and conducted
various other multiple lab tests to make the cottage cheese more edible,
nutritional and odour friendly. They had also changed the title of the Patent to
3|Page
‘Making paneer out of non-bovine sources’. Professor Sivaji maintained the

stance that they had not done anything contrary to law as ideas did not have any
copyright.
9. Aggrieved and unsatisfied with this reply, Mr. Vikram Vedha decided to
approach the Hon’ble High Court of Madras by filing a commercial suit against
his University for violation of his Intellectual Property Rights. He firmly
believed that the University was making unlawful gain from his thesis and
deliberately not paying him any royalty despite their own IP Policy stating in
Clause 3.1 that royalty in the ratio 60:40 would be shared between the inventors
and the University.
10. As mandated by law, the University filed a Written Statement apprising the Court
about new facts. They stated that the IP Policy of the University stated in Clause
2.1 that all IP belonged solely to the University. Furthermore, Clause 10.1 stated
in definitive terms that if any inventor/author had any grievance regarding their
intellectual property, they should approach the Vice Chancellor of the University
via a letter. Subsequently, mediation would be conducted and if mediation failed,
arbitration would be undertaken to resolve the issue. The University contended
that Mr. Vikram Vedha did not adhere to the dispute resolution process and
prematurely approached the Hon’ble High Court.
11. The University also presented a plagiarism report of Mr. Vikram Vedha’s thesis
showing that 80% of his thesis was plagiarised and thus, no copyright could
actually exist. This plagiarism report was dated 22/09/2022, years after the thesis
was actually submitted. The veracity of this report is debatable.
4|Page
12. On consideration of all facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble High Court framed
the following issues-
a. Whether the suit filed before this Hon’ble Court was maintainable in the
light of dispute resolution process laid down in the IP Policy not being
followed?
b. Whether the thesis was literary work in which copyright subsisted?
c. Whether the patent filed by the University in Australia violated copyright
of Mr. Vikram Vedha?
13. The present matter, Mr. Vikram Vedha v. School of Excellence in Food Sciences
& Ors. is coming up for final arguments in November, 2022. It is to be noted that
laws of Republic of Pushpa are pari materia to the laws of India.
NOTE:
1. The participants are NOT allowed to frame additional issues. They can
however make as many sub-issues as they deem necessary.

2. The participants have to strictly adhere to the given fact sheet. No facts
beyond the fact sheet shall be entertained.
5|Page

Moot Proposition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Moot Proposition

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Moot Proposition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTRA-UNIVERSITY INTELECTUAL PROPERTY LAW

MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

HOSTED BY THE MOOT COURT ASSOCIATION OF

9th August, 2023 to 12th August, 2023

Mr. Vikram Vedha

3. In the same year, a University named School of Excellence in Food Sciences

4. To keep up with changing times, the University introduced a clause of

‘Making paneer out of non-bovine sources’. Professor Sivaji maintained the

of Mr. Vikram Vedha?

however make as many sub-issues as they deem necessary.

beyond the fact sheet shall be entertained.

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.