Landmark trademark case judgement
And, as they say, a wise individual is the one who learns not just from their own mistakes, but also from the mistakes others make. Sulochana Bai had held that the scheme of the Act is such where rights of the prior user are recognised superior than that of the registration and even the registered proprietor cannot disturb interfere with the rights of the prior user.
AIR SC In this case the Court did so quite emphatically.
Trademark distinctiveness cases
It identified the following criteria in order to decide an action of passing off on the basis of unregistered trademark : The nature of the marks i. The Court went on to even clarify what is to be looked into to determine the terms of employment. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present petition. While allowing the appeal, the Apex Court broadly made the following conclusions in the case: The Apex Court to arrive at its decision primarily relied on the cases of Polaroid Corporation vs. In the present case, Hermes was holding a substantial share in the market place. In the present matter, the defendant, Bisleri by a master agreement, had sold and assigned the trade mark MAAZA including formulation rights, know-how, intellectual property rights, goodwill etc for India only with respect to a mango fruit drink known as MAAZA to Coca-Cola. That once a film has been cleared by CBFC for viewing, there is a presumption in its favour including of the same being not defamatory of any one.
The intent of the judiciary is clear. It simply confers additional benefits to those who register for it. James Chadwick and Bros wherein it was opined that the real question to decide in such cases is to see as to how a purchaser, who must be looked upon as an average man of ordinary intelligence, would react to a particular trade mark, what association he would form by looking at the trade mark, and in what respect he would connect the trade mark with the goods which he would be purchasing.
Landmark trademark cases 2018
In this regard it would be appropriate to note the documents filed by the defendant placing on record copies of the screenshot of websites of Hermes dated 10th January, showing its B2C user falsifying the claim of the plaintiff that Hermes was not operating in the B2C space. The Madras High Court, deciding on the question whether dubbing of a film into another language would fall foul of the rights of the scriptwriter, held that the producers have the right to replace the sound recording of the original film with a different language. It identified the following criteria in order to decide an action of passing off on the basis of unregistered trademark : The nature of the marks i. The respondents contended that the communication of renewal i. Dashrath B. Even if the registrar of companies approves such names, we must advise our clients that practice of keeping company name or domain name deceptively similar to any other person is bad in law and the original person will very easily obtain a stay and seek damages. The defendant sent a legal notice repudiating the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, leading to the present case. If he were permitted to do so great loss would be caused not only to the rival trader but to those who depend on his business for their livelihood. Hence, in such circumstances, there was hardly any question of confusion or deception. Our advice in all trademark infringement case is to represent your version, being absent in the court proceeding does not help.
Bombay High Court In this recent case, the Bombay High Court has reiterated the settled principle of Trademark Law that a mark cannot be removed from the register of trademarks for non- renewal unless the Registrar of Trademarks has sent O-3 Notice to the registered proprietor of the mark.
Components and Shafts vs. Bayer Corporation v. In what is known till date as a Landmark judgment in cybersquatting, the Delhi High Court held that a domain name served the same function as a trademark and was therefore entitled to equal protection. The Court went on to even clarify what is to be looked into to determine the terms of employment.
We are well-versed with the framework of intellectual property in Alberta and beyond.
based on 63 review