Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The appellant’s mark is not registered, but it is using the mark ‘Kataria’ being its surname with continuity and have encashed upon it by creating a business world by use of the goodwill of their forefathers/predecessors and are banking upon the same.”
“A comparison of the original artistic works of the plaintiff posted on Instagram with that of the infringing works of Defendants1 and 2 posted on Instagram clearly depicts, prima facie, infringement of the copyrights of the plaintiff.”
“Once the infringing goods were available for sale, the tort of infringement, which predicates use of the infringed mark, or a mark which is deceptively similar thereto, for trade, stood committed.”
“The concept of personality right has gained momentum by reason of unauthorised exploitation on digital platforms and social media for commercial gain, which often results in tarnishing or damaging the personality rights of an individual and more often of a renowned and well-known personality.”
“Where a word constitutes a prominent and essential part of a registered composite/label mark, the unauthorised use of that word would amount to infringement within the meaning of Section 29(9) of the Trade Marks Act.”
“The balance of convenience lies in favour of the Plaintiff, and if the Defendants are not restrained, the Plaintiff would suffer irreparable injury which cannot be adequately compensated in terms of money.”
“Plaintiff’s reputation and goodwill was such that the plaintiff’s tagline, ‘Come home to Siyaram’ was indelibly etched in public memory.”
“The recognition accorded to the SOCIAL mark by industry associations in India and consistent enforcement of the plaintiff’s rights in the mark before the Courts in India reinforces the mark’s distinctiveness and reputation.”
“The franchise agreement prima facie indicated acceptance of ownership of the plaintiff in the registered trademarks and permitted use only during subsistence of the agreement.”
“Well settled principles for assessing the deceptive similarity lays emphasis on visual appearance as well as the phonetic similarity i.e. that the marks have to be judged by the eye as well as the ear.”
“The Defendants shall each pay a sum of Rs. 5 Lakhs as costs to the Plaintiff within a period of 8 weeks from today.”
“Both the restaurants are premium restaurants which would obviously cater to a distinct well informed and well-educated consumer base and the likelihood of confusion is bleak in such cases.”
“Where explanation for adoption of the mark is not honest and there are two different versions with different reasons and which reasons themselves are not proved, such explanation should be disregarded on the principle that things speaks for themselves.”
The Court opined that a party seeking interim injunction in a passing-off action must produce concrete evidence of use, goodwill, and business turnover.
“This Court came to a prima facie finding of overall deceptive similarity in the rival marks and that the impugned marks and the artwork adopted by the defendant is deceptively and confusingly similar to that of the Asian Paint Ltd.’s mark.”
“The proprietary right of the plaintiff in the registered trade mark ‘GOLD FLAKE’ was prima facie demonstrated through the registrations and uninterrupted use since 1905, and its reputation and goodwill were evident from the sales turnover and the leading presence in the cigarette manufacturing industry.”
“The registration of the plaintiff’s mark in the year 1972, prima facie, granted an exclusive right to the plaintiff to use it, which was infringed when the defendants used the impugned mark METRO FOOTWEAR.”
This article explains the concept of personality rights and how a surge in celebrity lawsuits is reshaping the law on identity, privacy, and digital misuse in India.
The defendants were engaged in providing taxi services across Dehradun and Delhi and were marketing themselves as an inter-state national level service, using the name ‘JIO’.
“Asha Bhosle has the right to control the use of all facets of her personality since the same formed part of her exclusive Personality Rights and the misappropriation of the same without her consent was liable to be restrained not only on the basis of the publicity rights but also on the basis of the tort of dilution, more particularly, tarnishment.”