Understanding Trademark Protection in India: What Can and Can’t Be Trademarked

What Can and Cannot Be Trademarked in India - Intellect Vidhya

Registration of a business’s trademark is one of the most important steps that can be taken to protect a company’s identity as well as the reputation of its goods or services in the marketplace. In India, the Indian Trademark Act of 1999 governs the legal framework for trademark protection. This act specifies the criteria for registering trademarks and those that are ineligible for protection. This article explores what can and cannot be trademarked according to the Indian Trademark Act,1999.

Section 9: Absolute Grounds for Refusal of Trademark Registration

Section 9 of the Indian Trademark Act, 1999, enumerates the absolute grounds for refusal of trademark registration. These grounds identify categories of marks that are inherently incapable of being registered as trademarks in India. As per this this provision, trademark does not include any mark which is:

Devoid of Distinctive Character

Trademarks that lack distinctiveness or are generic or descriptive in nature are ineligible for registration. For example, the word “Computer” cannot be registered as a trademark for computer hardware, as it is a generic term. However, a distinctive and non-descriptive term like “Apple” can be registered as a trademark for a technology company.

Consisting Exclusively of Generic or Common Names

Trademarks that primarily consist of common or generic terms related to the goods or services offered cannot be registered. For instance, “Soap” cannot be registered as a trademark for a soap manufacturing company. However, a unique and distinct name like “Dove” can be registered as a trademark for a soap brand.

Customary in Current Language or Trade Practices

Trademarks that have become customary or usual in everyday language or trade practices are not registrable. This provision prevents the monopolization of common terms. For example, the term “Supermarket” cannot be registered as a trademark for a grocery store.

Likely to Deceive or Cause Confusion

Trademarks that are likely to deceive the public or cause confusion regarding the nature, quality, or origin of the goods or services are ineligible for registration. For instance, a mark that closely resembles an existing famous brand may cause confusion among consumers and therefore be refused registration.

Contrary to Law or Morality

Trademarks that are against public policy, offensive, or immoral are refused registration. This provision ensures that trademarks align with societal norms and values. For example, a mark containing explicit or offensive language would be rejected.

Section 11: Relative Grounds for Refusal of Trademark Registration

Section 11 of the Indian Trademark Act deals with the relative grounds for refusal of trademark registration. It focuses on the similarity or identity of the proposed mark with existing marks. Let’s understand this provision in more detail:

Under Section 11, a trademark application may be refused if it is identical or similar to an earlier registered trademark or pending application in the same or similar class of goods or services. The objective is to prevent confusion or misleading associations among consumers. The Registrar of Trademarks compares the proposed mark with existing marks and examines factors such as visual similarity, phonetic similarity, and conceptual similarity to determine the likelihood of confusion.

For instance, an online marketplace, Company M, intends to register the mark “eBayzy” for its e-commerce services. However, there is an existing registered mark for “eBay” owned by Company N, a well-known global online marketplace. Company M’s trademark application may be rejected under Section 11 due to the similarity and likelihood of confusion with the earlier registered mark.

What Can Be Trademarked?

The Act recognizes various forms of subject matter that are eligible for trademark protection. Let’s explore the different types of subject matter that can be trademarked:

Words, Names, and Slogans

One of the most common forms of trademarks is words or combinations of words that serve as brand identifiers. These can include brand names, product names, slogans, or catchphrases. Examples of word-based trademarks include “Google,” “Amazon,” “Just Do It” (Nike’s slogan), and “Think Different” (Apple’s slogan).

Logos and Designs

Trademarks can also take the form of logos, designs, symbols, or graphic elements. These visual representations serve as distinctive identifiers for businesses. Examples include the Nike “swoosh” logo, the Apple logo, the Mercedes-Benz three-pointed star emblem, and the Starbucks mermaid symbol.

Labels and Packaging

Distinctive labels and packaging designs can also be registered as trademarks. These help consumers identify specific products or brands based on their visual appearance. For example, the unique packaging of Toblerone chocolate bars, the curvaceous Coca-Cola bottle design, and the distinctive shape of the Pringles potato chip canister can be registered as trademarks.

Shape of Goods

Section 2(1)(zb) explicitly states that the shape of goods can be included as part of a trademark. This provision allows businesses to protect the distinctive shape of their products as a trademark. Notable examples include the unique shape of the Coca-Cola bottle, the iconic design of the Mini Cooper car, and the shape of the Toblerone chocolate bar.

Combinations of Colors

The Trademarks Act, 1999, recognizes that combinations of colors can also serve as trademarks. This provision allows businesses to protect unique color combinations associated with their brand. For instance, the specific red color used by Coca-Cola or the brown color associated with UPS can be registered as trademarks.

It is important to note that the mark must be capable of being represented graphically, meaning it can be visually depicted in a clear and understandable manner. Additionally, the mark must be capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person or business from those of others. This means that the mark should possess distinctiveness and not be common or descriptive.

Conclusion

Trademark registration is a vital aspect of protecting the intellectual property rights of businesses. Under the Trademark Act, 1999, several types of trademarks are eligible for protection. It is crucial for businesses to understand these guidelines to ensure effective trademark protection and avoid potential conflicts. Seeking professional guidance and conducting a thorough trademark search before applying for registration can help businesses make informed decisions regarding their intellectual property rights in India.

Frequently Asked Questions

What can and can’t be trademarked in India?

In India, trademarks that can be registered include words, names, slogans, logos, designs, labels, packaging, shapes of goods, and combinations of colors. Non-distinctive or generic terms, descriptive marks, marks that are likely to cause confusion, deceptive marks, marks against public morality, and marks that are already in use or similar to existing registered marks cannot be trademarked. Additionally, marks that are contrary to law, government symbols, and marks that are devoid of distinctive character are also ineligible for trademark registration in India.

Can I trademark a common word?

Yes, it is possible to trademark a common word in India under certain conditions. While generic or commonly used words are generally considered less distinctive and harder to register as trademarks, it is still possible to obtain trademark protection for a common word if it is used in a unique or distinctive manner and has acquired secondary meaning associated with specific goods or services.

Can I trademark a color?

Yes, it is possible to trademark a color in India, but it can be a challenging process. In order to successfully register a color as a trademark, you must demonstrate that the color has acquired distinctiveness and is associated with your specific goods or services in the marketplace. You need to show that consumers recognize the color as an indicator of the source of the goods or services.

Can I trademark a misspelled word?

Yes, it is possible to trademark a misspelled word. The key consideration for trademark registration is the distinctiveness of the mark. If the misspelled word is unique and distinctive enough to differentiate your goods or services from others, it may be eligible for trademark protection.

Can two words be a part of single trademark?

Yes, it is possible for two words to be a part of a single trademark. Combining two or more words to create a distinctive and unique mark is a common practice in trademark registration.

Share:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
WhatsApp

Related Posts

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 »
Understanding Personality Rights in MEME ERA - Intellect Vidhya

Understanding Personality Rights in MEME ERA

What do personality rights entail? Before we delve into the recent legal disputes, let’s first grasp the concept of personality rights. In basic terms, personality rights (also referred to as publicity rights) refer to the rights that an individual has to manage the commercial use of their name, image, likeness, or other distinctive aspects of their identity. These rights hold great significance for celebrities, as their public image often holds substantial commercial worth. The Growing Importance of Personality Rights in India: Striking a Balance Between Safeguarding Celebrities and Preserving Freedom of Expression India has witnessed a notable increase in legal cases concerning the rights of individuals, especially those in the public eye such as celebrities and media personalities. These cases have ignited discussions about finding a balance between an individual’s personal rights and the essential right to freedom of expression. Let’s delve into three recent cases that have significantly influenced India’s perspective on personality rights. The Jackie Shroff Saga In May 2024, Bollywood actor Jackie Shroff took legal action to safeguard his identity, voice, images, and his well-known catchphrase “Bhidu” (a popular slang term for friend in Mumbai) against any unauthorised usage. The decision made by the Delhi High Court was intriguing as it took into account not only Shroff’s rights, but also other relevant factors. The court declined to remove a YouTuber’s parody video that cleverly utilised Shroff’s persona. The judge acknowledged the artistic nature of these videos and their potential as a source of income for young creators. This decision demonstrated a growing recognition among courts of the significance of online content creation and meme culture, particularly among younger individuals. Anil Kapoor’s Case: In a previous incident, Anil Kapoor, another renowned actor, found himself in a legal battle for comparable motives. In this instance, the court examined personality rights from a unique perspective – as a means of safeguarding a celebrity’s livelihood. The court emphasised the potential impact on a celebrity’s income from endorsements and other business deals when their image or voice is used without permission. They likened it to piracy, implying that exploiting a celebrity’s persona could be akin to robbing them of their earnings. India TV and Aap Ki Adalat: In May 2024, a highly debated incident unfolded, centering around Rajat Sharma, a prominent TV journalist, and his show “Aap Ki Adalat” (Your Court). A satirist, Ravindra Kumar Choudhary, has been using the names “Jhandiya TV” (a play on words meaning “Depressing TV”) and “Baap ki Adalat” (Father’s Court) in his content. The court ruled that Choudhary must cease using these names, as they were found to violate India TV’s trademarks and Sharma’s rights to his own identity. This decision caused concern among individuals who value free speech, as they feared it could potentially hinder the creation of parodies or the ability to comment on public figures. Why is this relevant to you? You may be curious about the significance of these celebrity court cases for everyday individuals. Allow me to explain: 1. Impact on Content Creation: These cases have an influence on the type of content that creators are able to produce. If courts become more stringent, it could potentially pose challenges for creating parodies or offering commentary on public figures. 2. Online Content: Numerous young individuals generate income by producing online content. These decisions have a significant impact on the actions and content creators can take in their videos or posts. 3. Public Debate: In a democracy, it’s crucial to have the freedom to engage in discussions and even poke fun at public figures. These cases have a significant impact on the extent to which we are able to exercise our freedom. What comes after this? As India grapples with these intricate matters, here are a few suggestions that could contribute to establishing a more equitable system: 1. Improved Guidelines: It is important for courts to establish more precise rules when it comes to striking a balance between protecting personality rights and upholding free speech, particularly in the context of parodies and satire. 2. Caution in Issuing Court Orders: It is important for courts to exercise caution when issuing orders that restrict content, ensuring that both sides of the story are heard. 3. Recognising Varied Uses: It’s important to distinguish between utilising someone’s image for financial gain and using it for the purpose of commentary or critique. It is important for courts to acknowledge and understand this distinction. 4. Public Interest: Courts must consider the potential value of allowing commentary on public

Read More »
Understanding Derivative Works Legal Definitions and Implications in India

Understanding Derivative Works: Legal Definitions and Implications in India

In the realm of intellectual property rights, the concept of derivative works holds significant importance, particularly in the context of copyright law. A derivative work is a creation that is based on or derived from an original copyrighted work, thereby giving rise to a new work with its own set of rights and obligations. In India, the legal framework governing derivative works is outlined in the Copyright Act, 1957, and its subsequent amendments. Definition of Derivative Works As per the Indian Copyright Act, a derivative work is defined as a work that is created by adapting or translating an original literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic work. This includes, but is not limited to, adaptations in the form of cinematographic films, sound recordings, translations, abridgments, condensations, and arrangements. Types of Derivative Works Derivative works can take various forms, depending on the nature of the original work and the creative process involved. Some common types of derivative works include: 1. Literary Derivative Works:    – Translations of novels, poems, or plays into different languages    – Abridgments or condensations of longer literary works    – Sequels, prequels, or spin-offs based on original stories or characters 2. Dramatic Derivative Works:    – Film adaptations of plays or novels    – Stage musicals based on literary works or films 3. Musical Derivative Works:    – Cover versions or remixes of existing songs    – Arrangements or transcriptions of musical compositions for different instruments or ensembles 4. Artistic Derivative Works:    – Sculptures or paintings based on existing works of art    – Photographic reproductions or digital manipulations of artworks 5. Software Derivative Works:    – Modifications or enhancements to existing computer programs    – New software applications built upon existing code libraries or frameworks Legal Implications The creation of a derivative work requires permission from the copyright owner of the original work, unless it falls under the exceptions provided by the fair use or fair dealing provisions of the Copyright Act. Case Study The adaptation of Chetan Bhagat’s novel “Five Point Someone” into the hugely popular film “3 Idiots” generated significant controversy. While the movie was a commercial and critical success, it faced backlash for deviating substantially from the original novel’s narrative and themes. Critics argued that by taking a broader, more mainstream approach, the film oversimplified the novel’s critique of the Indian education system and the struggles of IIT students. They accused the filmmakers of exploiting Bhagat’s work for commercial gain while failing to accurately represent its essence. There were also concerns about the portrayal of certain characters, like the entirely new character of Rancho, and the exaggerated depiction of IIT life and the education system. Despite these criticisms, “3 Idiots” sparked conversations about educational reforms and the pursuit of passion over societal expectations. However, the controversy highlighted the challenges of adapting works that tackle sensitive social issues, and the need for faithful and respectful representations of the source material. Implications and Considerations The concept of derivative works has far-reaching implications in various creative industries, including literature, music, film, art, and software development. It is crucial for creators and authors to understand the legal framework surrounding derivative works to avoid potential infringement issues and to protect their intellectual property rights effectively. When creating a derivative work, it is advisable to obtain proper licenses or permissions from the original copyright owners to ensure compliance with the law. Additionally, consulting with legal professionals or intellectual property experts can provide valuable guidance on navigating the complexities of derivative works and ensuring that the creative process remains within the bounds of the law. It is also important to note that the boundaries between original works and derivative works can sometimes be blurred, particularly in cases where the derivative work incorporates substantial new creative elements or transforms the original work in a significant way. In such cases, the derivative work may be considered a separate, original creation, subject to its own copyright protection. Conclusion In conclusion, derivative works play a vital role in the creative ecosystem, fostering adaptation, innovation, and cultural exchange. However, it is essential to strike a balance between encouraging creativity and protecting the rights of original authors. The Indian Copyright Act provides a comprehensive legal framework for regulating derivative works, ensuring that the rights of both the original creators and the authors of derivative works are safeguarded. By understanding the legal nuances and adhering to the principles of fair use and proper attribution, creators can navigate the realm of derivative works while respecting intellectual property rights.

Read More »
Filing a Trademark for a Restaurant in India – A step by step Guide

Filing a Trademark for a Restaurant in India – A step by step Guide

Filing a trademark is crucial for protecting your restaurant’s brand identity, name, and logo from potential infringement or misuse by others. In India, trademarks are governed by the Trademarks Act, 1999, and the process of registration is overseen by the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trademarks (CGPDTM). Step 1: Conduct a Trademark Search Before filing for a trademark, it is essential to conduct a comprehensive search to ensure that your desired mark is not already registered or closely resembling an existing trademark. This search can be done through the CGPDTM’s online database or with the assistance of a trademark attorney or agent. A thorough search helps avoid potential conflicts and legal complications down the line. Step 2: Determine the Appropriate Classes Trademarks are classified into different classes based on the goods or services they represent. Restaurants primarily fall under Class 43, which includes “services for providing food and drink; temporary accommodation.” However, depending on the offerings, restaurants may also consider filing in other related classes. Additionally Relevant Classes for Restaurants: Filing in multiple classes is recommended if your restaurant offers a diverse range of products or services beyond just food and beverages. Step 3: Prepare the Application Once you have determined that your desired mark is available, you can proceed with the application process. The trademark application can be filed online through the ipindia.gov.in website, which serves as the official portal for filing all kinds of intellectual property applications in India. Alternatively, you can opt for offline filing by sending a physical copy of the application. The prescribed form for filing a trademark application is called TM-A. The application should include: Step 4: Submit the Required Documents Along with the application form, you must submit the following documents: Step 5: Pay the Applicable Fees The fees for filing a trademark application in India vary based on the number of classes and the mode of filing (online or physical). For a single class in the online filing mode, the fee is currently INR 4,500 for individuals and startups/ MSMEs  and INR 9,000 for others. Additional fees apply for each additional class. For example, if filing in two classes, the fee would be INR 9,000 for individuals/startups and INR 18,000 for others. Step 6: Examination and Publication After submission, the application will undergo a formal and substantive examination by the appropriate trademark registry. The formal examination checks if the application meets all the necessary requirements, while the substantive examination assesses if the mark is distinctive, not deceptive, and not conflicting with existing trademarks. If the mark meets all the requirements, it will be published in the Trademarks Journal for opposition. This is an opportunity for any interested parties to oppose the registration of the mark within four months from the date of publication. If no opposition is filed or if the opposition is unsuccessful, the mark will proceed to registration. Step 7: Registration and Renewal If the application is successful, the trademark will be registered, and a registration certificate will be issued by the Trademark Registry. Trademarks in India are valid for 10 years from the date of filing and can be renewed indefinitely for successive 10-year periods by paying the prescribed renewal fees.It is essential to keep track of the renewal deadlines and file for renewal well in advance to avoid the lapse of your trademark registration. Additional Considerations: By following these steps and complying with the Trademarks Act, 1999, you can successfully register a trademark for your restaurant in India, safeguarding your brand and establishing a strong market presence.

Read More »