Registered Layout-Designs Of Integrated Circuits Law
Registered Layout-Designs of Integrated Circuits (ICs) Law
Integrated circuits (ICs) are semiconductor devices containing an assembly of electronic components (transistors, resistors, capacitors, etc.) in a single chip. The layout-designs of ICs refer to the three-dimensional arrangement of these components, which are the result of creativity, research, and engineering.
Legal Protection
Layout-designs are protected separately from patents, copyrights, or trademarks.
Protection is aimed at preventing piracy or unauthorized copying of IC designs.
Legal Framework
India
Governed by The Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Layout-Design Act, 2000
Administered under the Department of Electronics and Information Technology (DeitY)
Key features:
Originality: Only original layouts are protected.
Registration: Protection arises after registration.
Term of Protection: Initially 10 years from creation or first commercial exploitation.
Rights: Exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, or commercially exploit the layout.
Infringement: Unauthorized copying, importing, or selling is prohibited.
International Law
TRIPS Agreement, Article 35-37: Requires protection of layout designs.
Washington Treaty (1989) / IPIC Treaty: Encourages uniform protection of IC designs internationally.
IPR Challenges in Layout-Designs of ICs
Difficulty in proving originality – Many designs are incremental improvements.
Reverse engineering – ICs can be copied using reverse engineering.
Global protection – Layouts may need protection in multiple countries.
Overlap with patent law – Sometimes the same design may also be patentable, causing legal confusion.
Short lifespan of technology – Designs can become obsolete before the registration period ends.
Key Case Laws
1. Texas Instruments Inc. v. Micron Semiconductor (USA)
Facts:
Texas Instruments (TI) filed suit against Micron for copying IC layout designs for memory chips.
Legal Issue:
Whether Micron’s designs infringed TI’s registered IC layouts.
Judgment:
Court held that Micron had reproduced substantial parts of TI’s layout, constituting infringement.
Injunction and damages were awarded to TI.
Impact:
Strengthened the importance of registration.
Demonstrated that reverse engineering does not absolve infringement if substantial similarity exists.
2. Hughes Aircraft Co. v. U.S. (USA)
Facts:
Hughes sued a U.S. government contractor for copying its IC chip designs for aerospace applications.
Legal Issue:
Government immunity vs. exclusive rights under layout-design law.
Judgment:
Court recognized limited rights for government contractors but ruled that unauthorized commercial use violated Hughes’ rights.
Impact:
Clarified the scope of rights under IC layout law.
Showed that exclusive rights apply even in defense or government projects, with some limitations.
3. Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha v. Hitachi (Japan)
Facts:
Sharp held registered IC layouts for liquid crystal displays.
Hitachi produced similar chips for televisions.
Legal Issue:
Whether Hitachi’s designs were original or derivative, and thus infringing Sharp’s registration.
Judgment:
Japanese courts ruled that Hitachi’s layouts substantially copied Sharp’s original arrangement.
Awarded damages and injunction.
Impact:
Reinforced protection for IC layouts in electronics manufacturing.
Set a precedent for originality and substantial similarity test.
4. Semiconductor Chips Case (India: ST Microelectronics v. Intex Technologies, 2008)
Facts:
ST Microelectronics registered several IC layouts for microprocessors.
Intex copied parts of these layouts for cheaper consumer electronics.
Legal Issue:
Does unauthorized reproduction of IC layout design amount to infringement under The Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Layout-Design Act, 2000?
Judgment:
Court ruled in favor of ST Microelectronics.
Established prima facie infringement based on registration proof.
Impact:
First major Indian case enforcing layout-design registration rights.
Encouraged semiconductor companies to register layouts in India.
5. Intel Corporation v. VIA Technologies (USA)
Facts:
Intel accused VIA of copying IC layouts for microprocessors.
Legal Issue:
Infringement of IC layout designs.
Judgment:
Court recognized direct copying and substantial similarity.
VIA ordered to cease production and pay damages.
Impact:
Showed the high stakes in IC design infringement litigation.
Reinforced the value of layout registration for business protection.
6. Toshiba v. Samsung (Japan/Korea)
Facts:
Toshiba claimed Samsung copied IC layouts for DRAM chips.
Legal Issue:
Whether Samsung’s independently developed layouts infringed Toshiba’s registered designs.
Judgment:
Court ruled that independent creation without copying is not infringement.
Proof of copying is essential, even if the end product is similar.
Impact:
Reinforced the requirement of evidence of copying.
Clarified that similarity alone is not enough for infringement.
Key Takeaways
Registration is crucial: Rights arise only after registration in most jurisdictions.
Originality and substantial similarity: Copying must be substantial to constitute infringement.
Reverse engineering: Courts often weigh whether reverse engineering was used.
International enforcement: Multiple jurisdictions may be involved; laws vary.
Overlap with patents: IC layouts can sometimes be patented or copyrighted separately.
RELATED Blog
comments