Browse the Trade Marks Journal each week and you’ll find marks that are unique, brilliant — and occasionally eyebrow-raising. Indian law bars registering “scandalous or obscene” matter, but where exactly is the line? And what happens when an examiner doesn’t know a word’s meaning?
How the Journal works
Once a mark is filed and examined, if the Office has no concern (or concerns are addressed), it’s published in the Trade Marks Journal — out every Monday — so owners can check for similar filings and oppose within the statutory window (now four months) of publication. The Journal captures the human urge to associate with something bigger — from copies of the Nike swoosh to word marks placed beside humbler names.
The scandalous/obscene bar
Indian trademark law (Section 9(2)) says a mark can’t be registered if it contains scandalous or obscene matter. The terms are left to judicial interpretation, but the Trade Marks Manual offers guidance:
- Merely distasteful marks won’t be objected to;
- only marks that would cause outrage among the public attract objection; and
- the general stance: nudity or sexually explicit material forming part of a mark is obscene and should be removed.
Marks against public morality
The Manual also addresses marks against public morality and policy — for instance, “WHITE DOVE” could be objected to as drug slang (for MDMA). By that logic, a mark that is slang for illicit or explicit content — especially when paired with a suggestive image — should be treated as scandalous.
When meaning slips past the examiner
A practical wrinkle: a mark can be advertised simply because the examiner was unaware of its meaning. If a word’s meaning is unknown, the mark reads as inherently distinct as a label and doesn’t describe the goods — so it may clear examination without objection, especially where few similar marks exist on the register.
That’s where third-party vigilance matters: anyone can write to the Registrar to flag a mark’s actual meaning (and how, with an accompanying image, it becomes scandalous) — and then oppose it during the publication window if needed.
The takeaway
The scandalous/obscene bar exists — but it turns on public outrage, not mere distaste, and depends on the examiner recognising the problem. If a questionable mark slips through to advertisement, the remedy is to inform the Registrar and, if warranted, oppose.
The takeaways
- Section 9(2) bars scandalous/obscene marks — but the threshold is public outrage, not distaste.
- Nudity/explicit content is treated as obscene and removable.
- Drug slang and immoral references can be refused on public-policy grounds.
- Examiners can miss meanings — third parties can flag and oppose such marks.
Frequently asked questions
Can a scandalous or obscene trademark be registered in India? No — Section 9(2) bars marks containing scandalous or obscene matter; the Trade Marks Manual treats marks causing public outrage, or containing nudity/explicit content, as objectionable.
Is a merely distasteful mark objectionable? No — the Manual says a merely distasteful mark won’t be objected to; only marks that would cause public outrage are refused.
What if a mark’s offensive meaning is missed at examination? It may be advertised; third parties can then inform the Registrar of the meaning and oppose the mark within the publication window.
Can slang be a ground for refusal? Yes — marks that are slang for narcotics or immoral content can be objected to on public-morality grounds (e.g. “WHITE DOVE” for MDMA).
Useful official resources
- The Trade Marks Act, 1999
- Trade Marks Registry — IP India