Sound Board

Our thoughts and views on the practice of Intellectual Property in India and around the world.

Champagne, Puma, Darjeeling Tea and Ford are known all over the world. A common man would recognize the given names as famous brands. On looking closely it can be realized that the above mentioned names do not belong to the same category.

The facts narrated in one of recent orders of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) send out one clear signal: constant vigilance!

The trademark registration process, which we have covered in an earlier post is fairly straightforward. A trademark application is filed, examined by the Trademark office, either refused or allowed subject to a hearing, advertised and registered if it is not opposed. In this post I’ve decided to cover the examination process and in particular responding to an examination report.

The Petitioner Sri Darshan Kumar started a partnership firm along with Sri Ranjit Kumar Sharma (Respondent) and Sri Raj Kumar in the year 2004. In due course of the business the firm started using the mark BAWA/BAWA FEED for goods such as cattle feed, poultry feed and other allied goods. On 22nd September the respondent filed for a trademark registration for BAWA/BAWA FEED under classes 31 and 35, claiming usage of the mark from 1st April 2001. Both the applications had the address of the firm…

The term “ objected ’ implies that the particular trademark application has been examined and a report generated as well, laying down the objections against the registrability of the mark.

Many a time, the online status of a mark shows ‘ exam report issued ,’ perceiving which, one might assume that it implies ‘issuance of examination report’ post examination of the mark. But in reality, the said status is being used by the Trademark Office to denote that the mark has been ordered to be advertised and is yet to be advertised.

In my earlier posts (here and here), I discussed the position of law on injunctions, the requirements for grant of temporary injunction and relevant cases with respect to trademarks in India. So let’s assume that we managed to restrain the defendants from using our trademark, what next? We want the defendants to pay (literally) for what they did and compensate our losses, to the maximum possible extent. This sum of money claimed as compensation for loss or injury is what we refer to as damages.…

The year 2014 has witnessed a lot of goods entering the family of Geographical Indicators ( GI ). Goods such as Madurai Malli (jasmine), Pattamadai Pai (Pattamadai mat), Nachiarkoil Kuthuvilakku (Nachiarkoil lamp), Toda Embroidery, Thanjavur Veena and Chettinad Kottan (palmyra basketry) have all become a part of the GI family thus bringing Tamil Nadu with the second highest number of registered GIs in the country; A total of 24.

In my last post, I dealt with the first condition i.e. ‘prima facie case’ to be established when praying for a grant of temporary injunction. It is only when all the three conditions are fulfilled that the Court will take into consideration the prayer of temporary injunction. As in the case of prima facie, the other two conditions can be best explained with reference to principles and tests laid down by the Courts. However, there is no straight jacket formula to ascertain whether they exist or…

The Tea Board of India holds the famous GI “Darjeeling” and the logo of a woman holding tea leaves, as well as the certification trade mark “Darjeeling” under the Trade Marks Act, in connection with “tea”. ITC, Limited used “Darjeeling Lounge” as the name for its executive lounge at its Kolkata hotel, the ITC Sonar. The Tea Board had previously filed a suit against ITC for using the word Darjeeling for their lounge. The suit mainly revolved on issues of infringement of the GI and the…