TRADEMARKS

The Delhi High Court in a case [1] restrained one party by the name of Sachin Gupta from using the COW device mark and the other essential features of the label and trade dress of the KBM foods either in isolation or in conjunction with each other. The court ruled that use of the COW device mark by Mr. Sachin Gupta is causing deception amongst the public, making them believe that these goods belong to KBM foods and therefore, need to be restrained.

The Delhi High Court in a case[1] denied to restrain ITC from using their packaging for their biscuits holding that though the ITC’s packs are similar in appearance to the Britannia’s packs, the points of similarity are insufficient to render the pack of the ITC’s confusing or deceptively similar to that of the Britannia.

Madras High Court in a case [1] permanently restrained a Company by the name of Carrying on business from using the trademark ‘GEM’S GOLD’ of Gem Edible Oil Private Limited (GEOPL). GEOPL argued that they have designed an artistic work in a unique packing cover with a particular colour scheme and created a distinct label and image and identity for the brand ‘GEM’S GOL Madras High Court in a case[2] restrained one party by the name Vimal Sehnaaz (India) from using the mark ‘BANSURI’ of one Manohar Singh because of continuous usage of this mark. The court held that Manohar Singh had made out prima facie case and this was strengthened by their registration

The maker of Lil Nas X’s ‘Satan Shoes’ has settled a trademark dispute brought by Nike and will buy back doctored Nike shoes it has sold. The terms of the settlement include a voluntary recall that allows MSCHF to buy back the Satan Shoes for their original retail price. MSCHF said on April 1 it had shipped at least 200 pairs of the shoe before a judge granted Nike’s temporary restraining order to stop processing the orders.

copyright

The Central Government by way of an Ordinance, namely the Tribunals Reforms (Rationalization and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021, published in the Gazette of India dated April 4, 2021 (the “Ordinance”) has abolished the Intellectual Property Appellate Board  (IPAB) which was established in 2003  under Trade Marks Act, 1999 and was exercising original and appellate jurisdiction under the provisions of the Patents Act, 1970, the Copyright Act, 1957 and the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999. 

Join our newsletter and get 20% discount
Promotion nulla vitae elit libero a pharetra augue