Trademarks Archives | Page 19 of 68

Weekly Trademark Updates

This week’s trademark updates are as follows: The tussle between TATA and HakunaMatata finally settles The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Tata Sons Private Limited and barred a company in UK from using the ‘TATA’ trademark in its course of trading cryptocurrency or sale of digital tokens. The order of permanent injunction was passed against HakunaMatata $TATA Founders, who were made to change their name to HakunaMatata Token Ltd. The defendant company was also asked to start a new…

October 7, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Geographical Indications (GI), Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 880Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Weekly Trademark Updates

This week’s trademark updates are as follows: Delhi High Court prevents website from using the trademark "Live Law" because of "intent to cash in on goodwill." The Delhi High Court has issued an ad interim injunction in favour of Live Law Media Private Limited, the business that owns the legal portal livelaw.in, preventing "Tiya Law Library" and a Haryana-based attorney from using the mark/name "Live Law" until further orders and ordering the internet service providers to block access to the website…

September 30, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Geographical Indications (GI), Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 1034Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Weekly Trademark Updates

This week’s trademark updates are as follows: Its TATA vs TAATAS.COM The TATA Group has recently filed a lawsuit with World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) Arbitration and Mediation Centre seeking the recovery of the domain name taatas.com on the grounds that it was identical to the well-known TATA trade and services mark. The Panel did recognize that the marks were phonetically similar and that the plaintiff had a legitimate interest in reclaiming the domain because of their reputation in India and…

September 23, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Geographical Indications (GI), Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 1327Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Weekly Trademark Updates

This week’s trademark updates are as follows: CHAAYOS trademark infringement dispute referred to mediation Sunshine Teahouse Private Limited had filed an infringement suit against the CHAIOPS café. Sunshine claimed that the Defendant’s brand name CHAIOPS was infringing upon their mark CHAAYOS. The Delhi High Court noted that there were no similarities between the device and logo of the two parties and that there existed only phonetic similarity between the two. Hence, stating the possibility of an amicable settlement, the Delhi High…

September 16, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Geographical Indications (GI), Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 912Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

How many of these brands do you know?

On August 15th 2022, the Office of Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (“CGPDTM”) notified a list of trademarks which would be added to the list of Well-known Trade Marks in the Trade Marks Journal No: 2065. The Registrar of Trade Marks considered requests received under Rule 124 of the Trade Marks Rules 2017, which allows any trade mark owner to file a request in Form TM-M requesting the Registrar to declare their trademark as 'well-known'. This list of well-known…

September 16, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 2276Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Weekly Trademark Updates

This week’s trademark updates are as follows: Kashmir seeks to add more products to its GI list Kashmir seeks to obtain the GI tag for five of its crafts: Kashmir Namda, Wagguv, Shikara, Gabba and Kashmir Willow Bat. The Director of the Handicrafts & Handloom Kashmir had an extensive discussion with the authorities of Intellectual Property India, Chennai and requested them to accelerate the process of registration, “The dossier for registration of these crafts has already been submitted to the Intellectual…

September 9, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Geographical Indications (GI), Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 963Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Weekly Trademark Updates

This week’s trademark updates are as follows: Domino’s dominates Trademark Dispute against Dominick Pizza In a recent case, the Delhi High Court restrained a Ghaziabad based pizzeria, named Dominick Pizza, from using the marks Dominick Pizza’, ‘Cheese Burst’ and ‘Pasta Italiano’ in any manner as they were identical or deceptively to the trademarks owned by Domino’s. The High Court stated that, “The reviews of the consumers on Google Reviews, also re-affirms this fact that apart from the confusion that is taking…

September 2, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Geographical Indications (GI), Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 1061Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Image accompanying blogpost on "CASE BRIEF : Havells India Limited. vs. Panasonic Life Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr."

CASE BRIEF : Havells India Limited. vs. Shanghai CET Electric Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Facts of the Case: Havells India Limited, the Plaintiff, filed an application against Shanghai CET Electric and others (hereinafter together referred to as the Defendants) alleging them to be guilty of committing Contempt of Court for violating the orders passed by the Honourable Court dated – 10.01.2019 and 31.05.2019 (hereinafter the “1 st order” and “2 nd order”, respectively). The Court in its 1 st order, after establishing a prima facie case having been made…

September 2, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 1816Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Weekly Trademark Updates

This week’s trademark updates are as follows: House of Zana wins trademark dispute against Zara International fashion giant, Zara, recently objected to the registration of the trademark ‘House of Zana’ by a Darlington-based fashion boutique House of Zana in the UK, claiming that the mark is identical and is likely to cause confusion amongst the average consumers. The Hearing Officer, Matthew William, opined that, although Zara is a common word, the word “House of” has a distinctive nature and…

August 26, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Geographical Indications (GI), Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 888Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

CASE BRIEF : Osram GmbH & Anr. Vs. Tejmeet Singh Sethi & Anr.

Facts Plaintiffs, M/s Osram GmbH and Osram Lighting Private Limited [“OLPL”] filed a suit against Mr. Tejmeet Singh Sethi and Mr. Hartej Singh Sethi (Defendants) claiming their rights in the registered Trademark “OSRAM”. This mark was adopted by OLPL internationally in 1906 and later registered in India in 1945 by General Electric Company Limited. Plaintiffs were engaged in manufacturing a range of products comprising Lumilux Plus Fluorescent Lamps, CFL lamps and other related products. Plaintiffs found that Defendants, who were…

August 25, 2022 BananaIP Reporter Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 1294Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Weekly Trademark Updates

Weekly Trademark Updates

Weekly Trademark Updates

Weekly Trademark Updates

How many of these brands do you know?

Weekly Trademark Updates

CASE BRIEF : Havells India Limited. vs. Shanghai CET Electric Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Weekly Trademark Updates

CASE BRIEF : Osram GmbH & Anr. Vs. Tejmeet Singh Sethi & Anr.

Connect with Us

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

Connect with us