Category Archives: Trademark

Trademark

Delhi High Court Examines Intermediary Liability for Trademark Infringement (Part – II)

by
Leave a Comment

In my previous post, I broke down Ms. Justice Prathiba Singh’s recent judgement in Christian Louboutin v Nakul Bajaj, and noted its importance for intermediary liability and e-commerce players in India. In this post, I examine the Court’s approach towards intermediary liability, and attempt to outline what exactly the judgement means for e-commerce platforms. (Update: On November 12, the Court also made a similar ruling on similar facts in L’oreal v Brandworld, relying upon its earlier judgement in Christian Louboutin.)…


Read More »
Trademark

Groundless Threats of Trademark Infringement Result in Ex-Parte Order Preventing the Defendant from Initiating Ex-Parte Proceedings

by
Leave a Comment

In Kokanratna Holiday Resorts vs. Millennium & Copthorne International Limited, the Bombay High Court recently passed an order that required the Defendant to give prior, written notice of 7 days to the Plaintiff before initiating any legal proceedings against them pertaining to the trademark ‘Hotel Millennium Park’. The order passed ex parte by Justice Kathawala, therefore precludes the Defendant from initiating ex parte proceedings to claim interim relief against the Plaintiff. Background and Decision The Plaintiff is a hotel based…


Read More »
Trademark

Delhi High Court Examines Intermediary Liability for Trademark Infringement (Part – I)

by
Leave a Comment

In a significant judgement for e-commerce in India, the Delhi High Court in Christian Louboutin SAS v Nakul Bajaj and Ors., (decided on November 2), has recently attempted to clarify the responsibilities and liability of online intermediaries for trademark infringement. The judgement both clarifies and in some part obfuscates India’s intermediary liability regime as it relates to trademark infringement. Ms. Justice Prathiba Singh’s judgement is particularly important considering it is the first time the issue of trademark infringement by online…


Read More »
Trademark

SC on Passing Off and Delays

by
Leave a Comment

In a recent decision, Wockhardt Limited vs. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., a 2-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court clarified certain important principles of passing off of trademarks and delays and acquiescence.  Factual and Procedural Background Pharmaceutical company, Torrent (“Plaintiff/ Respondent”) owns branded drugs named “CHYMORAL” and “CHYMORAL FORTE”. These drugs are used to alleviate swellings and wounds which may occur post-surgery. Rival company, Wockhardt, (“Defendant/Appellant”) started selling products under the name of “CHYMTRAL FORTE”, thereby merely substituting the letter ‘T’ with…


Read More »
Trademark

Skechers USA v. Pure Play Sports – Implications of Actual Costs and Taxation of Costs – A Notable And Welcome Change In the IP Regime

by
Leave a Comment

We’re pleased to bring to you a guest post by Abhimanyu Chopra. Abhimanyu is a Senior Associate at AZB & Partners. He has obtained his B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) degree from Amity Law School, New Delhi and his LL.M. degree from New Law College, Pune and is currently pursuing his PhD in Cyber Law from Amity Law School, Noida. He is also a qualified cyber forensics expert. He is currently practicing in the area of commercial litigation and arbitration with special focus…


Read More »
Trademark

McCarthyism in Indian IP

by
2 Comments

Scared you, didn’t I? With the title I mean. Triggering memories of an evil epoch in US history where fear reigned supreme. Where friends told on friends, to appease a blood thirsty committee trying to eradicate the curse of communism from a capitalistic America. But this McCarthy is a far cry from the evil one. This is J Thomas McCarthy, an IP rock star who influenced the course of trademark law, not just in the US but in far flung shores…


Read More »
Trademark Unfair Competition

Mahindra Embroiled in Another “Fiat”-sco!

by
Leave a Comment

A long-standing rivalry between Mahindra and Mahindra and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles took a new turn on 11th September 2018, when the US International Trade Commission (“USITC”) [the US federal agency which investigates matters of trade and interrelated IP infringement issues] instituted an investigation based on a complaint made by Fiat. In its complaint, Fiat makes allegations of trade dress, trademark infringement and unfair competition under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 against Mahindra for “sale of certain motorized vehicles and components”. Section 377 provides…


Read More »
Trademark

“Drugs Are Not Sweets” – Bombay HC Imposes Exemplary Costs for Pharma Trademark Infringement

by
Leave a Comment

In Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. Curetech Skincare and Anr., Mr. Justice Kathawalla of the Bombay High Court imposed costs of 1.5 crores against the defendant found to be ‘habitually’ committing trademark infringement of pharmaceutical products. The decision is significant for the quantum of damages awarded and the reasoning (or lack thereof) behind the award of exemplary costs. Brief Background The dispute concerns Mumbai-based generics manufacturer Glenmark, and its product Candid – B (an anti-fungal cream). The principal defendant is Galpha…


Read More »
Trademark

The Dilemma of Determining Well-Known Marks

by
3 Comments

In a trademark infringement suit, Texmo Industries inter alia prayed that their mark, TEXMO, be declared as a well-known mark under Section 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Under sub-sections (6)-(9), this section lays down a number of factors that must be considered before granting well-known status to a mark. However, in this particular case, the issue that was raised, was whether the High Court had the power to declare a mark as well-known. This question arises primarily due…


Read More »
Copyright Overlaps in IP Patent Trademark

Obscenity and Morality under IP Law

by
1 Comment

  Obscenity under  the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”) is a relic of India’s colonial past. Though the need for such a provision is often subject to debate, it is indisputable that the judiciary’s interpretation of this provision has been often been anachronistic in past instances. The judiciary has, no doubt, evolved from the infamous Hicklin Test (tendency of the impugned material to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences) to the contemporary community standards (testing the impugned material against contemporary…


Read More »
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. ...
  12. 66