Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The lack of bona fide on the part of the defendant is also demonstrated from the fact that it has adopted an identical colour combination of ‘blue and white’, as used by the plaintiff. Pertinently, most of the measuring tapes of the defendant selling under different marks do not bear the ‘blue and white’ colour combination.
It is not necessary for a registered owner of a trademark to proceed against all entities using similar marks in order to proceed against any one of them. There may be a myriad reasons why a proprietor of a registered trademark may refrain from proceeding against entities that it considers are using infringing marks.
The case arises from the alleged infringement of Eveready’s trademarks by the defendants. Eveready contends that the defendants’ use of the mark “EVERYDAY” for electric gas lighters is deceptively similar to Eveready’s “EVEREADY” trademark.
The word ‘DISH’ is a common English word which denotes Dish Antenna and cannot be described as a prominent or an essential feature of such nature so as to allow the plaintiff a monopoly over its use. The two products at dispute were “DD Free Dish” by Prasar Bharti (Doordarshan) and “Dish TV” by Dish TV India Limited.
Sterling Agro Industries emerges victorious in the trademark clash between NOVA and NOVYA, as Delhi High Court decrees in their favor, enforcing a permanent injunction against the defendants and awarding litigation costs.
In Lulu v. Coolulu trademark dispute, the Karnataka High Court chided the competent authority for not considering the nuances of the dispute properly, which meant that the impugned order did not show even a semblence of application of mind.
“For a contract to be enforceable, the restraint of trade clause must be reasonable.” [Rajesh Kumar Gandhi v. Mukesh Dutt] Read the
United States Patent and Trademark Office: Cataldo, Adlin and Lebow, Administrative Trademark Judges, decided whether SPOTIFY is entitled against dilution by blurring
Delhi High Court: While addressing a trademark dispute between Rooh Afza and Dil Afza manufacturers, Asha Menon, J., expressed that, buying a