The Dilemma Of Prima Facie!

 

Patents ain’t Prima Facie! Trademarks, Copyrights, G.I., Designs Are! Domain Names? Explicitly Nope! Implicitly Yes (because of different cctlds and gtlds, and without even its registration, where the context of domain names even arose?).

The only thing what prima facie grants you is the exclusive Infringement Provision in the latter four cases to the rights holder. And in my earlier blogs, I opined that why structure of the Patents as per TRIPS, PCT, is a bit Flawed. Read that blog! Because, if you’ve something territorial, then it should also be applicable to what’s included in the FERs/SERs.

But in this blog, I’m discussing about the context of Prima Facie, which, if given a chance, I would change its spelling and definitions many times. Is it the Prime Force on the Face of IP? NAH! The only thing that separates it from the non-registrations is -> Infringement Rights been bestowed, except that in the case of Patents, wherein there’s no such thing called Prima Facie!

Now, my question is -> do we need it? YES & NOPE! But again, the full circle is drawn w.r.t. my previous Dilemmas. Why the ICANN failed to put the first barrier at the time of domain name registrations with the Registrars acting as the first barrier for them? Then, why the WIPO’s PCT, act as the UDRP in terms of the Examination Reports; but then restrict the rights to the territorial jurisdictions (it is understandable why it is done), but again, why it can’t work like the Trademarks or Designs when it comes to the initial objections part, wherein the objections are only territorially restricted as in the latter case, rather, its scope been expanded to global! I think even the WIPO would agree with me on this part, and so as ICANN! I’ve already published in my earlier blogs about the same dilemmas.

Why need for the term Prima Facie then? If at the time of the registration of any proprietorships; companies or medicines (in case of the companies and medicines it is not at full scale implemented yet), or partnerships (again, partnership’s registrations were also prima facie), then my theory could’ve been implemented, and the context of Prima Facie would’ve been removed from the context of IP altogether.

It is again understandable that, not everyone can go for even for the simple prosecution of the Copyrights; so for Copyrights, it is essential; but, for the rest, I think, the concept of prima facie and its only expansion till the term Infringement, is a conundrum, at least to me!

Now, again, if for one case, you’ve similar or several case precedence, then I think, either we’ve not understood the case, or, may’ve lost in the interpretations only. 😊

© Pranav Chaturvedi