India
The 7–Eleven “Big Bite” Dispute: Limits of Trans-Border Reputation
When it comes to trademark rights, a common assumption among global brands is that international fame and reputation automatically guarantee protection for their mark in every jurisdiction. However, the ruling of the Madras High Court in the dispute between 7–Eleven International LLC and Ravi Foods…
No Automatic Abandonment for Delay in Filing Evidence: Madras High Court Brings Clarity to Rules 45 & 46 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017
Recently, the Madras High Court in the case of ACE Foods Private Limited vs The Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr (CMA(TM) No. 22 of 2025), dealt with the question of whether Rule 45 and 46 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017 are ultra vires to the powers vested under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and held…
Can trademark law be used to extend protection over product shapes after design rights expire? The Harpic bottle dispute raises important questions
Product packaging plays a crucial role in the consumer goods market where distinctive designs often become closely associated with a brand, such as the iconic Harpic bottle. To protect such features, companies commonly rely on design registrations, however, design protection is limited in duration…
Well-Known Trademarks Are Not Absolute: Key Takeaways from the Vicks Judgment
It is a well-settled principle of trademark law that marks declared or recognised as well-known by the Trade Marks Registry or Courts enjoy a higher degree of protection. However, trademark owners often operate under the assumption that such protection grants blanket exclusivity across all classes…
Procedural neglect at the Indian Trade Marks Office results in trademark cancellation
Trademark owners often assume that once a mark is registered, the hardest part is over. In India, that assumption can be dangerously misleading. A recent judgment of the Madras High Court demonstrates how procedural neglect both by applicants and by the Trademarks Office (TMO) can result in the…
3D shape marks can now attain ‘Well-known’ status in India: Does your brand qualify for the enhanced protection?
The recent Delhi High Court ruling by Justice Tejas Karia in Hermes International & Anr. vs Macky Lifestyle Private Limited & Anr (Cs(Comm) 716/2021 & I.A. 17569/2021) granting well-known trademark status to the 3D shape of Birkin bags marks a significant development in Indian trademark…
India Accepts Its First Smell Mark – Can Your Brand Register One?
We bring to you a recent significant development in Indian trademark law, which may be helpful to enhance protection for your brands in India. The Indian Trade Marks Registry has, for the first time, accepted a smell trademark for a rose-scented tyre filed by Sumitomo Rubber Industries Ltd., which…
Intellectual Property and Caste-Based Atrocities
Introduction: The Supreme Court recently upheld the Bombay High Court's decision in the case of Principal Secretary, Government of Maharashtra and Anr. v. Kshipra Kamlesh Uke & Ors., involving compensation for intellectual property loss under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes…
Delhi High Court Orders Amazon to Pay Rs. 339 Crore Damages: A Wake-Up Call for E-Commerce Giants on Counterfeit Goods
In a landmark ruling on February 25, 2025, the Delhi High court ordered Amazon to pay a hefty Rs. 339.25 crore in compensatory damages for the sale of counterfeit Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC) goods on its platform. This case highlights the intersection of trademark law and e-commerce regulation,…
Trademark turbulence: Interglobe Aviation Vs Mahindra Electric Automobile Ltd
In a recent dispute between India’s largest airline, IndiGo, and automobile manufacturer Mahindra Electric, (Interglobe Aviation Vs Mahindra Electric Automobile Ltd, DHC - CS(COMM) 1073 / 2024) the issue surrounded the alpha numeral “6E”. For IndiGo, the 6E callsign has been an integral element of…