Sound Board

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

The case involved a dispute between Wipro Enterprises Ltd., the registered owner of the trademark "Chandrika," in respect of goods covered in class 3, and M/S Mariyas Soaps and Chemicals, the registered owner of the trademark "Chandra" in respect of goods covered in class 3. The court's ruling sheds light on the rights and limitations of registered trademark owners and the grounds for seeking relief in cases of similarity between registered marks.

In this article, we delve into the intricacies of the Calvin Klein case, exploring the Court's findings, and the implications of such actions on brand reputation and consumer trust. The plaintiff's trademark "Calvin Klein" was established and adopted in 1967, deriving its name from the founder. Since its inception, the plaintiff has extensively utilized both "Calvin Klein" and the abbreviated form "CK."

Charter 4 Corp, the plaintiff, claimed to have adopted the 'Supreme' mark back in 1994 in the United States and had been using it in India since 2006, gaining popularity among Indian customers. The company boasted over 700 global registrations for the mark 'Supreme', and they had also filed applications for their 'Supreme' red-box device mark in India.

Kamdhenu Limited filed an appeal against a decision of the Registrar of Trademarks, who had dismissed their application to have their trademark 'KAMDHENU' included in the "List of Well-Known Trademarks." The Registrar's rejection was the absence of an affidavit along with the supporting evidence to establish the well-known status.

The Controller General of Patents, Designs & Trade Marks (CGPDTM) has taken recent initiatives to clear backlogs in trademark prosecution and opposition matters, and a public notice was issued on February 6, 2023 encapsulating a gargantuan list of trademark application numbers that are said to pertain those applications that could be “deemed to be abandoned” as per the provisions of law. The said list was published along with Trademark Journal No: 2090, and the Office has been simultaneously…

In a trademark infringement suit filed by Hermes International, one of the prayers by HERMES is that the mark of Hermes is declared as a well-known trademark within the meaning of Section 2(1)(zg) of The Trade Marks Act, 1999.

In a welcome move, the Indian Trademark Office (TMO) issued a public notice via Trade Marks Journal No. 2090 dated February 6, 2022, whereby the general public & IP practitioners were informed that 1. Applications for which a response to the examination report has not been filed within the prescribed time & 2. Applications that have received oppositions and for which the TMO has properly served the notice of opposition to the applicant but where no counter-statement has been filed with the TMO

Renewing a trademark registration in India is an important process for businesses to maintain the exclusivity of their brand and protect their intellectual property. It is essential for businesses to understand the process of trademark renewal and the importance of timely renewal in order to avoid any potential issues or disputes.

Trademark registration in India is a process that allows businesses to protect their brand and intellectual property. A trademark registration is valid for a period of 10 years and can be renewed after the expiration of the initial registration period of 10 years.

As patent lawyers, meeting deadlines can be crucial to the success of a patent application. Two of the most important deadlines one needs to be aware of while prosecuting patent applications in India are the deadline for filing a request for examination and the deadline for filing a response to the first examination report.