Evaluating Trademark Infringement: Holistic View and Goods Differentiation to Determine Likelihood of Confusion

Evaluating Trademark Infringement: Holistic View and Goods Differentiation to Determine Likelihood of Confusion Featured image for Evaluating Trademark Infringement: Holistic View and Goods Differentiation to Determine Likelihood of Confusion

The Gujarat High Court’s decision in the Unisn vs. Unison case provides critical insights into evaluating trademark infringement. The court emphasized a holistic view of trademarks, considering the distinctiveness of goods and services, thereby ruling out the likelihood of confusion. This case reinforces the importance of product differentiation in trademark disputes.

Read more about Evaluating Trademark Infringement: Holistic View and Goods Differentiation to Determine Likelihood of Confusion

Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal Featured image for Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court upheld the decision to refuse CEAT Limited’s trademark application for “FARMAX.” Citing significant delay and potential confusion with existing marks, the Court dismissed the appeal. The decision underscores the importance of timely action and highlights the necessity for distinctiveness in trademark applications. Learn more about the case: Ceat Limited vs The Registrar Of Trade Marks.

Read more about Citing gross delay and strong likelihood of confusion, court refuses CEAT’s appeal

No monopoly rights over common surnames such as JINDAL, court dismisses injunction petition.

No monopoly rights over common surnames such as JINDAL, court dismisses injunction petition. Featured image for No monopoly rights over common surnames such as JINDAL, court dismisses injunction petition.

The Delhi High Court while deciding an application for interim injunction, held that the defendants did not infringe the plaintiff’s registered trademarks or pass off...

Read more about No monopoly rights over common surnames such as JINDAL, court dismisses injunction petition.

Delhi High Court passes order restraining the use of trademark “TOWER” for manufacture and sale of Dry fruits

Delhi High Court passes order restraining the use of trademark “TOWER” for manufacture and sale of Dry fruits Featured image for Delhi High Court passes order restraining the use of trademark “TOWER” for manufacture and sale of Dry fruits

The Delhi High Court allowed an interlocutory injunction against the Defendants to restrict their use of the mark “TOWER” to manufacture and sell dry fruits. This Court stated that a defendant cannot determine the ambit of what constitutes “Plaintiff’s goods of interest”.

Read more about Delhi High Court passes order restraining the use of trademark “TOWER” for manufacture and sale of Dry fruits