Monsanto Technology LLC vs Nuziveedu Seeds

Ltd., Civil Appeal Nos. 4616-4617 of 2018,

Supreme Court of India, decided on January 8,
2019

Monsanto Technology LLC is a company that has

developed and patented a technology called Bt
technology. This technology involves genetically
modifying cotton seeds to make them resistant to
pests. Monsanto licensed the technology to various
seed companies in India, including Nuziveedu
Seeds Ltd, under a sub-licensing
agreement.However, a dispute arose when
Monsanto terminated its sublicensing agreement
with Nuziveedu Seeds due to non-payment of
royalties. Nuziveedu Seeds continued to use the
technology, arguing that the termination was
illegal and that the royalty demands were
excessive and did not comply with Indian patent
law.There are four main legal issues surrounding
this dispute. Firstly, whether Monsanto's
termination of the sublicense agreement was valid.
Secondly, the determination of the amount of
royalties payable under the sublicense agreement.
Thirdly, the patentability of Bt technology under
the Indian regime - Patents Act, 1970. Finally, the
applicability of copyright protection to technology
under the Copyright Act, 1957.Recently, the
Supreme Court of India delivered a judgment
resolving a number of complex issues related to
copyright and patent law. The court held that
Monsanto's termination of the sublicense
agreement was invalid. Monsanto failed to comply
with the contract dispute resolution mechanism
before terminating the agreement. The court
directed that the matter of payment of royalty shall
be decided by a single judge of the Delhi High
Court who shall determine the amount of royalty
based on the terms of the sub-licensing agreement
and the regulations of Indian patent law.

The court found that the issue of patentability of

Bt technology is a complex scientific investigation
and requires detailed examination. Characteristics
introduced into seeds by genetic modification may
be covered by patent law, but this will need to be
carefully considered by a trial court.The court also
addressed the question of whether Monsanto's
technology could be protected by copyright law. It
should be noted that if the technology is involved
in the development of genetically modified seeds,
it may not qualify for copyright protection, which
typically includes literary, dramatic, musical and
artistic works.The Supreme Court referred the
matter to the Single Judge of the Delhi High Court
for detailed and focused consideration of the
scientific issues relating to the patentability of Bt
technology and determination of the number
royalties. The court also clarified that until the
Supreme Court's decision, Nuziveedu Seeds was
liable to pay royalties under the terms of the sub-
licensing agreement.This judgment is important
because it highlights the complexities involved in
the intersection of biotechnology law and
intellectual property law in India. It also
emphasizes the need for careful and detailed
consideration of the scientific evidence to
determine the scope of patent protection for
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and the
applicability of copyright law to these
technologies.