Intellectual Property Archives | Page 17 of 269

ITC Protects “Gold Flake” Brand: Court Halts Sale of Deceptively Similar Cigarettes

ITC Limited, the owner of the “Gold Flake” trademark for cigarettes, successfully obtained an injunction against competitors using confusingly similar brands like “Gold Falcon” and “Gold Flicker”. Continue Reading ITC Protects “Gold Flake” Brand: Court Halts Sale of Deceptively Similar Cigarettes

April 30, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 915Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Non-use of trademark is not a valid defense against injunction

A Taiwanese adhesive tape company successfully obtained an injunction against a competitor using “Reindeer” and “Reindeer Wonder” trademarks on PVC pipes. The Court found these marks deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s “Deer” brand and intended to mislead customers. Continue Reading Non-use of trademark is not a valid defense against injunction

April 29, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 776Views 1Like

ShareFacebook

Ad Agency sues Jindal Steels for Copyright Infringement

An advertising agency, Wieden+Kennedy, sued Jindal Steel for copyright infringement. Wieden+Kennedy claims Jindal Steel’s commercial copied their work product, despite not paying for the full project. The court found some similarities but didn’t rule on infringement. Since the contract included arbitration clause, the court directed the parties to settle through arbitration and asked Jindal Steel to deposit a security sum to prevent the commercial’s broadcast. Continue Reading Ad Agency sues Jindal Steels for Copyright Infringement

April 27, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Copyrights, Intellectual Property 0Comment 1327Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

No more ‘Social’izing for Social chai

The Delhi High Court has issued an ex-parte ad-interim injunction against a restaurant/café operating under the name of Social Chai. The Court held that the addition of the suffix “CHAI” to “SOCIAL” is insufficient to effectively differentiate the Defendant’s mark from that of the Plaintiff’s, especially due to the identical domain of restaurant services. Continue Reading No more ‘Social’izing for Social chai

April 26, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 511Views 1Like

ShareFacebook

Exacting Standards for Pharma Trademarks and their Dominant Parts

In this infringement and passing off case filed by Sun Pharma against Glenmark, the Court was asked to determine if the trademark “INDAMET” infringes upon the trademark “ISTAMET XR CP”. Sun Pharma’s “ISTAMET XR CP” was registered in 2014 by its predecessor in title, and Glenmark’s trademark, INDAMET, was registered in 2021. Continue Reading Exacting Standards for Pharma Trademarks and their Dominant Parts

April 25, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 730Views 1Like

ShareFacebook

Well-known mark not a pre-requisite for grant of relief against infringement

The dispute centers on the “PEBBLE” mark used by V Guard and Crompton. V Guard, adopting it in 2013 for electric water heaters, clashed with Crompton’s 2020 application for “CROMPTON PEBBLE” for electric irons. Delhi High Court’s injunction restrained Crompton from using “PEBBLE,” citing Trade Marks Act violations. The Court upheld V Guard’s reputation, dismissing Crompton’s appeal. Continue Reading Well-known mark not a pre-requisite for grant of relief against infringement

April 24, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 973Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

SEP, Infringment and principles relating to actual costs – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 5

In this case, the Court has crystallized and reiterated several patent principles relating to patentability under Section 3(k), novelty, inventive step, infringement of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs), Exhaustion, FRAND royalty determination, and so on. Along with other principles, the Court has also outlined the principles for grant of actual costs. Continue Reading SEP, Infringment and principles relating to actual costs – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 5

April 23, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 637Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Standard Essential Patents, Claim charts and Infringement – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 4

This post covers the aspects of infringement as discussed by the Delhi High Court in the Lava v. Ericsson case. The Court noted that the fulcrum of the dispute between the parties in this case was the issue of whether Lava was guilty of infringing Ericsson’s patents or not. Continue Reading Standard Essential Patents, Claim charts and Infringement – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 4

April 22, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 763Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Call for Feedback: CGPDTM Service Excellence Survey 2024

Participate in the CGPDTM Service Excellence Survey, 2024 to help shape the future of IP administration in our country. Share your feedback by April 22nd and contribute to the enhancement of intellectual property practices. Continue Reading Call for Feedback: CGPDTM Service Excellence Survey 2024

April 19, 2024 BananaIP Reporter General, Intellectual Property 0Comment 395Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Exploring Patent Hold Up, Royalty Stacking, and Hold Out. Ericsson v. Lava case. Part 3

Exploring Patent Hold Up, Royalty Stacking, and Hold Out – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 3

Several aspects of Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) Licensing were discussed in the Ericsson Vs. Lava Case, and in this post, we will discuss three of those: Royalty Stacking, Hold Up, and Hold Out. Continue Reading Exploring Patent Hold Up, Royalty Stacking, and Hold Out – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 3

April 19, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 795Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

ITC Protects “Gold Flake” Brand: Court Halts Sale of Deceptively Similar Cigarettes

Non-use of trademark is not a valid defense against injunction

Ad Agency sues Jindal Steels for Copyright Infringement

Exacting Standards for Pharma Trademarks and their Dominant Parts

Well-known mark not a pre-requisite for grant of relief against infringement

SEP, Infringment and principles relating to actual costs – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 5

Standard Essential Patents, Claim charts and Infringement – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 4

Call for Feedback: CGPDTM Service Excellence Survey 2024

Exploring Patent Hold Up, Royalty Stacking, and Hold Out – Ericsson v. Lava – Part 3

Connect with Us

BananaIP has been acknowledged as a women-owned enterprise, certified by WEConnect International.

Connect with us