BananaIP Archives | Page 3 of 10

Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?

This blog post discusses a recent court case in India concerning the validity of raising a trademark invalidity plea against an interim application under Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act. The court ruled that a plea of invalidity can be raised not only in the written statement but also in other pleadings and submissions, including counter-affidavits to interim applications. Continue Reading Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?

February 29, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 391Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Interesting Trademark Cases involving ‘Biriyani King’, ‘MI Sumeet’, and ‘Toofan’ Marks

Exploring recent judgments from the Delhi, Calcutta, and Madras High Courts on trademark disputes involving ‘Biriyani King’, ‘MI Sumeet vs. Nikoda Sumeet’, and ‘Toofan’, and understanding the courts’ approach to trademark protection. Continue Reading Interesting Trademark Cases involving ‘Biriyani King’, ‘MI Sumeet’, and ‘Toofan’ Marks

February 28, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 450Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Madras High Court allows Appeal under Section 91 with direction to amend word mark to label mark

In this case, the Madras High Court highlights the importance of addressing similarity concerns and pursuing registration as a label mark for stronger protection. This case with help gain insights for navigating trademark challenges in India. Continue Reading Madras High Court allows Appeal under Section 91 with direction to amend word mark to label mark

February 27, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 547Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Is a system for ‘Selectively Displaying Physical Address’ unpatentable as a business method?

Learn how a system for concealing user addresses in online transactions was deemed patentable, distinguishing it from excluded “business methods.” Gain insights for navigating patent applications in the digital age. Continue Reading Is a system for ‘Selectively Displaying Physical Address’ unpatentable as a business method?

February 26, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 404Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Refusal of patent application relating to ‘Soluble Foaming Composition’ set aside

Protein-free foaming innovation revived! Madras High Court overturns patent refusal due to Controller’s failure to address key arguments and consider crucial differences from prior art. This judgment highlights the importance of thorough analysis and considering applicant submissions in patent decisions. Continue Reading Refusal of patent application relating to ‘Soluble Foaming Composition’ set aside

February 22, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 390Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Image accompanying blogpost on "Madras High court provides clarity on Proof of right, says date of assignment and date of declaration are different."

Madras High Court provides clarity on Proof of Right, says date of assignment and date of declaration are different.

In this case, the Madras High Court sheds light on proving applicant’s right, emphasizing the difference between assignment and declaration dates. This case offers insights for smoother patent applications in India and is likely to provide much-needed clarity to Applicants and Controllers alike who often encounter the same or similar objections relating to proof of right under Section 7(2) and Rule 10 of the Patents Act. Continue Reading Madras High Court provides clarity on Proof of Right, says date of…

February 21, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 669Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Image accompanying blogpost on "by the Madras High Court"

Review and Reversal of Patent Refusal Orders by the Madras High Court

Madras High Court supports three inventions by overturning three patent refusals on grounds of Lack of valid grounds (RTA-408 case), failure to consider inventive features (fluidized bed boiler case) and procedural error (fuel temperature control case). Continue Reading Review and Reversal of Patent Refusal Orders by the Madras High Court

February 21, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Patents 0Comment 556Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Image accompanying blogpost on "Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says the Madras High Court."

Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says the Madras High Court.

“Chand” textile trademark owner loses infringement case against “Chand-A” lungi brand. Court finds long, honest, concurrent use by defendant since 1952 prevents confusion. Lack of concrete evidence weakens plaintiff’s claim of permissive use. Court outlines principles for proving honest and concurrent trademark use. Continue Reading Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says the Madras High Court.

February 19, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Trademarks 0Comment 833Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Oracle’s proprietary word ‘Java’ cannot be used in the domain name and the company name, says the Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court banned Javapoint companies from using the “Java” trademark for training and domain names. Though not part of their company names anymore, “Java” usage in services and domain is deemed infringing on Oracle’s trademark rights. This decision protects trademark ownership and sets a precedent for proper usage in the tech industry. Continue Reading Oracle’s proprietary word ‘Java’ cannot be used in the domain name and the company name, says the Delhi High Court

February 19, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Intellectual Property, Software, Trademarks 0Comment 1074Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Another dynamic plus order to curb online piracy from the Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court cracks down on piracy! In this case, the Court granted an injunction against 28 rogue websites pirating Universal Studios content. The injunction covers not just existing websites but also future versions and new ones that may arise. This applies to future Universal Studios content as well. ISPs and domain name registrars were ordered to block access and provide details of owners. Continue Reading Another dynamic plus order to curb online piracy from the Delhi High Court

February 16, 2024 BananaIP Reporter Case Reviews, Copyrights, Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law, Privacy / Data Protection, Social Media Law 0Comment 981Views 0Like

ShareFacebook

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Will a trademark invalidity plea in response to an interim application count for Section 124?

Interesting Trademark Cases involving ‘Biriyani King’, ‘MI Sumeet’, and ‘Toofan’ Marks

Madras High Court allows Appeal under Section 91 with direction to amend word mark to label mark

Is a system for ‘Selectively Displaying Physical Address’ unpatentable as a business method?

Refusal of patent application relating to ‘Soluble Foaming Composition’ set aside

Madras High Court provides clarity on Proof of Right, says date of assignment and date of declaration are different.

Review and Reversal of Patent Refusal Orders by the Madras High Court

Chand-z Vs. Chand-A For Lungis: Chand-A trademark is not infringing as the use is honest and concurrent, says the Madras High Court.

Oracle’s proprietary word ‘Java’ cannot be used in the domain name and the company name, says the Delhi High Court

Connect with Us

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

Connect with us