Skip to content

CS Professional · Intellectual Property Rights - Law and Practice · Layout-Designs of Integrated Circuits

Tara Devices applied to register a layout-design that is the result of its own efforts and is not commonly known, but it is so similar in its basic form to an already registered layout-design that it is not inherently capable of being distinguished from it. Which ground in Section 7(1) applies?

Clause (d) of Section 7(1) applies. It bars registration of a layout-design that is not inherently capable of being distinguishable from any other registered layout-design. The design is original and unexploited, so the other grounds are not engaged; the problem is its similarity to a registered design.

  1. AClause (a), because the layout-design is not original
  2. BClause (b), because the layout-design has been commercially exploited
  3. CClause (c), because the layout-design is not inherently distinctive only
  4. DClause (d), because it is not inherently capable of being distinguishable from any other registered layout-designCorrect

Explanation

Clause (d) bars a layout-design not inherently capable of being distinguishable from any other registered layout-design. The facts state the design is original, so clause (a) fails. Nothing indicates exploitation, so clause (b) fails. The specific defect described, similarity to a registered design, is clause (d).

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Layout-Designs of Integrated Circuits shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Layout-Designs of Integrated CircuitsFree diagnostic mock

More Layout-Designs of Integrated Circuits questions