A Comparative Case Law Analysis of John Doe and Anton Piller Orders

Abstract

Successful protection of Intellectual Property Rights (IP Rights) depends on effective laws, proper judicial adjudication, and execution of judicial orders. In other words, all the three organs of the State, namely, Legislature, Judiciary and Executive have to be extremely alert in protecting and preserving IP Rights, particularly, the trans-border reputation. The 'John Doe’ order is used to describe an injunction sought against a person whose identity is not known at the time of the issuance of the order. It thus, enables an IP owner to serve notice and take action against anyone, whose identity is unknown and found to be infringing the IP Rights. In other words, the order does not specify any one defendant in particular. The John Doe order allows the plaintiff’s solicitor to search the premises and deliver up evidence of infringement of the rights of the plaintiff by the unknown Defendant (John Doe). More often than not, the John Doe order, also known as the ‘Ashok Kumar’ order includes provisions for an interim injunction. The ‘John Doe’ order also affords the trademark or copyright owner the possibility of curtailing the infringer’s future activity by means of an injunction, while depriving the infringer of his stock of counterfeit goods by means of a seizure of those goods.