Trademarks
Perspectives on trademarks across India and the subcontinent.
30 June 2026
Both Marks 'Proposed to Be Used'? First to File Wins: Parle v. Registrar
Parle and Avon both filed for '20-20' on a 'proposed to be used' basis, seven days apart. Parle later used the mark — but the Delhi High Court held that when neither had used the mark at filing, the prior applicant (Avon) has superior rights under Section 18.
Raja Pannir Selvam · 23 April 2026
The Madrid Protocol and India: Pitfalls, Provisional Refusals and How to Respond
A complete guide to designating India through the Madrid Protocol — the built-in 'use' disadvantage, provisional refusals and deadlines, the ® and priority traps, deemed protection, dependency, and when to file nationally instead.
17 March 2026
7-Eleven's 'Big Bite': The Limits of Trans-Border Reputation
7-Eleven used 'Big Bite' globally since 1988 and filed in India in 1994 — but an Indian company using it since 2004 kept the mark. The Madras High Court reaffirmed territoriality: global fame and website presence aren't enough without proven goodwill in India.
Keerthana K · 13 March 2026
Late Evidence ≠ Case Abandoned: Madras HC Clarifies Rules 45 & 46
Missing the evidence deadline in an opposition should cost you the evidence — not the whole case. The Madras High Court held that Rules 45 & 46 don't support 'deemed abandonment' of the application or opposition itself.
11 March 2026
After a Design Right Expires, Can a Trademark Protect the Shape? The Harpic Bottle Dispute
Reckitt's Harpic bottle design expired — then it registered the shape as a trademark and sued Godrej's SPIC. The Calcutta HC Division Bench set aside the injunction, warning that trademark law shouldn't revive an expired design monopoly. What it means for shape marks.
17 February 2026
Well-Known Trademarks Aren't Absolute: Lessons from the Vicks Judgment
P&G's well-known 'Vicks VapoRub' couldn't cancel IPI's 'VAPORIN' — the Madras High Court held 'VAPO' is publici juris and well-known status confers no monopoly over generic elements. What brand owners should take from it.
3 February 2026
Nepal's DOI Trademark Notices: What Applicants and Brand Owners Should Know
Nepal's Department of Industry issued, then revoked, then reissued a series of trademark notices amid civil unrest — creating uncertainty over deadlines, documents and use requirements. The operative position, and the practical steps to protect your marks.
Raja Pannir Selvam · 2 January 2026
Advertised Without a Translation: A Registration Cancelled Years Later
Marks in Tamil and Telugu were advertised without the transliteration and translation the Rules require. The Madras High Court held that such an advertisement is no advertisement in the eye of law, and cancelled the registrations.
Keerthana K · 19 December 2025
3D Shape Marks Can Be 'Well-Known' in India: The Birkin Ruling
The Delhi High Court recognised the Birkin bag's 3D silhouette as a well-known trademark — confirming that a product shape can win the strongest, cross-class protection in India. What qualifies a shape.
Keerthana K · 4 December 2025
India Accepts Its First Smell Mark: Can Your Brand Register One?
India's Trade Marks Registry has accepted its first smell mark — a rose-scented tyre by Sumitomo — cracking the 'graphical representation' barrier with a 7-dimensional vector. What it takes to register a scent, and whether your brand's fragrance could qualify.
Adlin Mini M · 3 December 2025
The Maldives Gets a Real Trademark Law: What Rights Holders Should Do Now
The Maldives is replacing cautionary notices with a statutory, first-to-file registration system administered by a new IP office. The Act commences on 11 November 2026, with a 12-month window for existing rights holders to file — and prior use will no longer secure ownership on its own.
Raja Pannir Selvam · 1 April 2025
Wakefit Reclaims wakefit.in: Passive Squatting Is Still Bad Faith
A registrant parked wakefit.in on a pay-per-click page and hid their identity. Under the INDRP, Wakefit won it back — the tribunal holding that even passive holding of an infringing domain, plus concealment, amounts to bad faith.