Trans-border reputation of Trademarks in India.

A word, name, symbol, or device, which is able to identify or distinguish goods or services from others can come under the umbrella of Trademark. In other terms, Trademarks are basically almost anything that distinguishes the products and/or services from others. Even, the source of goods is indicated by Trademarks – which at times are even unknown to the consumer. The rationale for granting legal protection for Trademarks is based on the fact that they are a type of intellectual property right which demonstrate the standard and quality of products and/or services – mainly based on goodwill and reputation, and also at the same time provides legal protection to the brand from fraud and counterfeiting products and/or services. 

With a constant and long duration of usage of the Trademark, the marks gain a reputation of its own with the products and/or services that it is associated with. The reputation can be such that it is confined to a particular region, or is something which has gained popularity across borders. The popularity of Trademarks to percolate across the borders is more possible because of the advent of technology – which helps spread information locally as well as globally in no-time. 

Now, Trademark being one of the wings of Intellectual Property Law, and Law being one which evolves based on preceding and foundations as laid by the Court, Trademark law is no exception. Out of various theories in Trademark Law as is established by the court, ‘Trans-border reputation’ or ‘Cross-border reputation’ of Trademark is the theory which was established by the Courts of Indian in the celebrated case of N R Dongre v. Whirlpool Corporation, 1996 (16) PTC 583. 

Factual Background of the case:

The Whirlpool Corporation was the original and prior user of the trademark ‘whirlpool’ since 1937, which was associated with electrical goods, including washing machines. They got the trademark registered in India in 1956 which was renewed regularly, however, in the year 1977 they failed to do the renewal – and the registration expired. Subsequently, Whirlpool Corporation and TVS Whirlpool, a company incorporated in India entered into a joint venture in the year 1987 to sell machines with the said trademark. Prior to this, the machines were sold to the US embassy in India bearing the mark of whirlpool.

Meanwhile, Mr. N.R Dongre filed for registration of trademark ‘Whirlpool’ in the year 1986 – which, when published, was opposed by Whirlpool Corporation – the opposition was initially dismissed by Assistant registrar on basis of lack of reputation and non-usage of the trademark ‘whirlpool’ in India.

Subsequent proceedings:

TVS Whirlpool filed for an appeal against the order of the Assistant Registrar before the Delhi High Court, wherein, Single Judge Bench held the case in favour of TVS Whirlpool Ltd. The court stated, that TVS Whirlpool Ltd had been selling their products to the U.S embassy and ATO in India even before Mr. N.R Dongre came into the market. Additionally, TVS Whirlpool Ltd had given advertisements in various international magazines about the products under the trademark and name ‘Whirlpool’ – which were being circulated in India. Thus, a temporary injunction was granted against Mr. N.R Dongre and Co.

Subsequent to this, Mr. N.R Dongre and Co. filed an appeal before the division bench of the High Court and the decision of the Single Judge bench was upheld. Same was the case when a Special Leave Petition was filed before the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution.

Courts, in this case recognized the concept of ‘Trans-Border Reputation’ and established that in cases wherein one party has sufficient worldwide reputation in connection with a Trademark, they are entitled to seek protection in respect of the same irrespective of its market base or registration.

Further, in the case of Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha v. M/S Prius Auto Industries Limited, 2018 (73) PTC 1, the Supreme court held that to take the blanket of ‘Trans-Border Reputation’, one needs to prove that their mark has acquired substantial trans-border reputation (or goodwill) in India even when it has already acquired a good proportion of reputation in any other jurisdiction.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the reputation of a trademark?

Trademark is one of those Intellectual Property Rights whereby registration is not a mandate and, usage of the mark over time along with the associated goodwill, if proved, a mark owner can claim the mark to be exclusively his mark. Passing Off is the protection of the goodwill of traders about to with concerning goods and services. Now, “goodwill” is what comes with the reputation of the mark – and that is what provides inherent values to the trademark. Generally, the goodwill or reputation of a trademark is measured and valued when a company as a whole is bought or sold and the valuation associated with the goodwill is measured as the difference between the company purchase price and the value of the company’s tangible assets.

What is cross border reputation?

Cross-border or Trans-border reputation of a trademark comes into play when the mark in question crosses physical borders of territory or geography and gains the reputation of the goods or products associated with it in large. The doctrine of this Cross-border or Trans-border reputation was established in the case of N R Dongre v. Whirlpool Corporation, 1996 (16) PTC 583 whereby Supreme Court of India laid the foundation of the “Trans-Border Reputation”. The court held, even though Whirlpool was not selling in India, they can claim the benefit of transborder reputation irrespective of its market base or registration in India in scenarios when the mark has gotten wide acknowledgement and reputation across borders.

Cross-border or Trans-border reputation is different from ‘well-known trademarks’ in the sense, that Cross-border or Trans-border reputation is something which is not limited to any particular geographical territory or any specific provisions of law, while the well-known trademark can be understood as a trademark which has gained wide popularity across the country and moreover, which has reached beyond the limits of the goods and services. Further, well-known trademark is defined in Section 2 (1)(zg) of Indian Trade Marks Act 1999, while Cross-border or Trans-border reputation draws its meaning from case law precedence.

Why is reputation important for trademarks?

Reputation of a trademark is its indication of the fact it has a goodwill associated with the goods or services that it is linked to. Now, in cases whereby the reputation is not limited or confined to a particular border or territory, cross border or trans-border reputation comes into picture. In cases whereby a trademark has acquired cross border or trans-border reputation, the legal owner of that trademark can claim the protection in the business – which can be worldwide. 

What is Section 35 of the trademark Act?

Section 35 of Indian Trade Marks Act 1999 states: ‘Nothing in this Act shall entitle the proprietor or a registered user of a registered trade mark to interface with any bonafied use by a person of his own name or that of his place of business, or of the name, or of the name of the place of business, of any of his predecessors in business, or the use by any person of any bona fide description of the character or quality of his goods or services’.

This section indicates that a proprietor/user of registered trademark cannot interfere with a person or any of its predecessors with bonafied use of his name or place of business or both or use by any person of bonafied description of character or quality of goods. This section is more so applicable in cases whereby the mark isn’t applied for registration.

Share:

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on whatsapp

Related Posts

Micro Copyright in India: Protecting Small-Scale Creative Works

In the digital age, the creation and sharing of content have reached unprecedented heights. With the proliferation of user-generated content, short-form media, and the increasing significance of individual contributions to larger works, the concept of “micro copyright” has emerged. Micro copyright refers to the protection of smaller, often more granular, creative expressions. In the context of Indian copyright law, this concept presents unique challenges and opportunities. This article explores the intricacies of micro copyright and the conundrums surrounding its protection in India. Understanding Micro Copyright Micro copyright encompasses the rights associated with smaller creative works such as social media posts, memes, short videos, gifs, and even individual elements within larger works, like specific phrases or designs. These forms of content, while often brief and seemingly inconsequential, can hold significant value and can be the subject of copyright protection. The Legal Framework of Copyright in India The Indian Copyright Act, 1957, primarily governs copyright protection in India. The Act provides protection to original literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, cinematograph films, and sound recordings. For a work to be protected, it must be original and expressed in a tangible form. Challenges in Protecting Micro Copyright 1. Originality and Fixation One of the fundamental requirements for copyright protection is that the work must be original and fixed in a tangible medium. This can be challenging for micro content, where the line between original creation and common expression is often blurred. Determining the originality of a tweet, meme, or short video clip can be subjective and contentious. 2. De Minimis Doctrine The de minimis doctrine, which means “about minimal things,” can pose a significant challenge for micro copyright. This doctrine suggests that the law does not concern itself with trivial matters. Small snippets of content might be considered too insignificant to warrant protection, leaving creators without legal recourse for unauthorized use. 3. Fair Use The concept of fair use allows for limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders. In the context of micro copyright, determining what constitutes fair use can be particularly tricky. For instance, sharing a meme or a short clip might be considered fair use, but if it goes viral and gains commercial value, the original creator might seek protection and compensation. 4. Enforcement and Attribution Even if micro content is eligible for copyright protection, enforcing these rights can be challenging. Monitoring the vast expanse of the internet for unauthorized use of small-scale content is a daunting task. Additionally, the ease with which digital content can be shared and altered complicates the process of ensuring proper attribution and compensation. The Way Forward 1. Clearer Guidelines and Definitions To address the challenges of micro copyright, clearer guidelines and definitions are needed within the Indian Copyright Act. Defining what constitutes a protectable micro work and setting standards for originality can provide better clarity for creators and users alike. 2. Digital Rights Management (DRM) and Technology Leveraging technology, such as digital rights management (DRM) systems and content recognition algorithms, can help creators monitor and enforce their copyright more effectively. These technologies can automate the process of identifying unauthorized uses and facilitate easier enforcement. 3. Education and Awareness Increasing awareness among creators about their rights and the mechanisms available for protecting their content is crucial. Educational campaigns and resources can empower creators to navigate the complexities of copyright law and safeguard their micro creations. 4. Legal Reform and International Cooperation Given the global nature of digital content, international cooperation and harmonization of copyright laws can play a significant role in addressing the challenges of micro copyright. Legal reforms that consider the unique nature of digital content and micro works can provide a more robust framework for protection. Conclusion The rise of micro copyright in the digital era presents a unique conundrum under Indian copyright law. While the current legal framework provides a foundation for protecting creative works, the nuances of micro content require more specific attention and adaptation. By addressing the challenges of originality, fair use, enforcement, and attribution, and by leveraging technology and education, India can better protect the rights of creators in the evolving landscape of digital content.

Read More »
Importance of Trademarking your Restaurant Name - Intellect Vidhya

Importance of Trademarking your Restaurant Name

Have you ever walked into a restaurant, drawn by its catchy name or eye-catching logo, only to discover that it’s not the establishment you thought it was? In the bustling food and hospitality industry of India, this scenario is becoming increasingly common. As more and more eateries pop up, it’s crucial for restaurant owners to protect their brand’s identity through trademark registration. A trademark is like a unique fingerprint that sets your goods or services apart from the competition. It’s a legal stamp that says, “This is ours, and no one else can use it.” And in the world of restaurants, where first impressions can make or break your business, a strong trademark can be a game-changer. Why Trademarks Matter for Restaurateurs? Success Stories of Trademarked Restaurant Brands The Consequences of Neglecting Trademark Protection In the vibrant culinary landscape of India, trademarking your restaurant brand is more than just a formality – it’s a strategic move that can safeguard your business identity, maintain brand recognition, and provide legal recourse against infringement. By understanding the importance of trademarks and understanding the appropriate registration process under Indian trademark law, you can protect your valuable intellectual property and pave the way for a future as bright as a perfectly cooked dish, fresh out of the kitchen.

Read More »
The Significance Of Prior Use In The Trademark Law Vans V Ivans - Intellect Vidhya

The Significance of Prior Use in the Trademark Law: Vans v. Ivans

In the complex realm of intellectual property rights, few principles hold as much significance as the concept of “prior use” in Indian trademark law. The recent ruling by the Delhi High Court in the Vans v. Ivans case has brought attention to the fundamental concept of giving precedence to the first user of a trademark in the market. The Vans v. Ivans Case: The case centred on a disagreement between Vans Inc., a well-known American footwear and apparel company, and FCB Garment Tex, an Indian company that used the “IVANS” trademark. Vans Inc. filed a request to invalidate FCB Garment Tex’s trademark registration in India, claiming that their “VANS” mark had recently gained recognition as a well-known trademark in the country. Nevertheless, the Delhi High Court ruled in favour of FCB Garment Tex, citing the prior use principle. Important Factors in the Court’s Decision The court’s ruling was influenced by several crucial elements. Firstly, it emphasised that FCB Garment Tex had been using the “IVANS” mark in India for years before Vans Inc. entered the market, applying the “first in the market” principle. Furthermore, the court made it clear that simply declaring a trademark as well-known does not automatically give the owner the authority to cancel other marks that were used earlier in India. Finally, the court determined that FCB Garment’s utilisation of the marks was both sincere and simultaneous, granting them protection under Section 12 of the Trade Marks Act. Supporting the Principle of Prior Use This landmark ruling is a strong affirmation of the prior use principle in Indian trademark law. This principle emphasises that the initial user of a trademark in the market holds greater rights compared to later users, regardless of their registration status. This concept is deeply embedded in the Indian Trade Marks Act, 1999, and aims to safeguard businesses that have dedicated significant time and resources to establish their brand identity in the market. The Reasoning Behind Prior Use There are several reasons behind the prior use principle. It strives to recognise and safeguard businesses that have proactively built their brands in the marketplace. By prioritising the initial user, the law recognises the dedication and resources required to establish a strong brand presence and cultivate customer loyalty. This principle also helps to prevent unfair competition by ensuring that well-known brands are not replaced by new ones with similar marks, thus maintaining consumer trust and market stability. Territorial Nature of Trademark Rights In addition, the principle of prior use acknowledges the territorial nature of trademark rights. The Vans v. Ivans case clearly illustrates that having a worldwide reputation is not enough to establish legal rights in a particular jurisdiction. The principle highlights the significance of establishing a tangible market presence and utilising a trademark within India, rather than solely relying on international recognition or registration in other nations. Engaging with well-known Trademarks The prior use principle also has implications for other aspects of trademark law, including the recognition of well-known trademarks. The ruling by the Delhi High Court provides clarity on the advantages of having a well-known trademark status, while also acknowledging the rights of prior users in the market. This delicate equilibrium ensures the safeguarding of well-known local brands while acknowledging the prestige and recognition of globally renowned trademarks. Practical Considerations for Trademark Owners In practice, trademark owners are faced with a significant burden of maintaining proper documentation of their trademark use due to the prior use principle. This encompasses sales records, advertisements, and proof of customer recognition. Consistent and authentic use of the mark is essential, as any substantial gaps in usage can undermine a prior use claim. Conclusion Ultimately, the verdict of the Delhi High Court in the Vans v. Ivans case serves as a strong affirmation of the prior use principle within Indian trademark law. It emphasises the significance of having a strong market presence and building a reputable brand in order to establish and safeguard trademark rights in India. As the country continues to attract global brands while nurturing its own business ecosystem, this principle will undoubtedly have a significant impact on the development of trademark strategies and dispute resolutions.

Read More »
The Ethical and Legal Dilemma of AI Voice Cloning in the Music Industry - Intellect Vidhya

The Ethical and Legal Dilemma of AI Voice Cloning in the Music Industry

In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has made remarkable progress in various fields, including music production. Voice cloning in music has been a subject of intense debate, raising questions about copyright infringement, moral rights, and the preservation of artistic integrity. The recent criticism voiced by legendary Indian playback singer Kumar Sanu against AI voice duplication brings attention to the mounting concerns within the music industry. Power and Potential of AI Voice Cloning AI voice cloning technology has made significant progress in recreating the voices of singers with outstanding precision. This ability has resulted in the development of new songs that utilise the voices of artists who have passed away, as demonstrated in the recent example of “Pehle Hi Main.” This song was created using an AI-generated voice that mimics the late Mohammed Rafi, who sadly passed away in 1980. Although this technology presents fascinating opportunities for music production and preservation, it also brings up important ethical and legal concerns. Dealing with Copyright Infringement Copyright infringement is a significant legal concern when it comes to AI voice cloning. A singer’s voice is regarded as their valuable asset, safeguarded by copyright laws in numerous jurisdictions. When AI is employed to imitate a singer’s voice without authorization, it may potentially infringe upon copyright protections. This encompasses violations of reproduction rights, distribution rights, and the unauthorised creation of derivative works. Moral Rights and Personality Rights In addition to copyright concerns, AI voice cloning also brings up ethical and legal questions surrounding moral rights and personality rights. It is important for singers to safeguard their work from any alterations or manipulations that may negatively impact their reputation. Additionally, there is a potential for confusion and misrepresentation when AI-generated voices are not explicitly identified. Furthermore, in numerous legal systems, people possess the authority to regulate the commercial exploitation of their identity, appearance, or voice. Voice cloning might be perceived as a violation of these rights. Cloning the Voices of Deceased Artists Using AI to replicate the voices of deceased artists, such as Mohammed Rafi, brings about a whole new set of challenges. Although copyright protection usually lasts for many years after an artist’s passing, the ethical considerations surrounding the use of a deceased artist’s voice without their permission are quite substantial. There are concerns regarding the preservation of the legacy and artistic intentions of deceased musicians. Industry Response Kumar Sanu’s decision to pursue legal protection against AI voice cloning demonstrates a rising recognition of these concerns within the music industry. Other artists and industry professionals are also advocating for the establishment of regulatory frameworks to oversee the utilisation of AI in music production. There are several potential solutions being discussed to address the challenges posed by AI in music. These include establishing licencing protocols for the use of AI-cloned voices, requiring clear disclosure when AI voice cloning is used in a production, and developing specific laws to tackle these unique challenges. The Path Forward As AI technology advances, it is essential for the legal system to stay up to date. Collaboration between the music industry, legislators, and AI developers is crucial in establishing a framework that balances the protection of artists’ rights with the promotion of innovation. This could potentially include the need to revise copyright laws to specifically tackle AI-generated content, setting industry norms for the ethical application of AI in music production, and devising methods for artists to maintain control over and profit from the utilisation of their AI-replicated voices. Conclusion The emergence of AI voice cloning technology brings forth a range of possibilities and complexities for the music industry. Although it presents exciting opportunities for creativity, it also raises serious concerns regarding artists’ rights and the authenticity of their work. As evidenced by Kumar Sanu’s case, it is clear that there is a pressing requirement for the establishment of legal and ethical frameworks to regulate the utilisation of this technology. As we move forward with the more enhanced versions of AI, it’s crucial to find a harmony between technological advancement and safeguarding artists’ rights. It is crucial to establish thoughtful regulation and foster industry cooperation to ensure that AI positively impacts the creative ecosystem of the music industry.

Read More »