Case Reviews | Intellepedia

Court orders Meesho to display Seller Information and comply with Ecommerce Rules

The Delhi High Court has ordered Meesho to display full seller information and comply with ecommerce regulations following a copyright dispute. This decision highlights the responsibility of e-commerce platforms to protect intellectual property and ensure transparency for consumers.

Trademark refusal without notice and ‘40’ suffix similarity

Two recent Delhi High Court rulings clarify the consequences of unserved opposition notices and the assessment of trademark similarity based on numeric suffixes. The post analyses both decisions and discusses the procedural challenges in Indian trademark law.

Trademark removal only after notice, and Fly Hi/Timespro Injunctions

This post discusses key Indian trademark cases on removal and injunctions, with courts emphasising notice requirements for removal and granting injunctions against Fly Hi and Timespro infringers. The analysis highlights recent judicial trends in trademark protection.

Prosecution History Estoppel applies to trademark cases, confirms the Bombay High Court.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that prosecution history estoppel extends to trademark cases, impacting a party’s rights based on prior representations. Full disclosure of all prosecution material is required in trademark litigation for fair adjudication.

3 Roses, Brooke Bond, Tiche, and Ahuja Trademark Cases

This post analyses recent Indian trademark cases involving 3 Roses, Brooke Bond, Tiche, and Ahuja. It discusses counterfeiting, damages, and wrongful registration issues, providing insights for trademark owners and distributors.

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

The Madras High Court has clarified that a trademark invalidity plea under Section 124 can be made in documents beyond the written statement, such as counter affidavits in interim applications. This broad interpretation ensures that the right to seek rectification is preserved even if the written statement is forfeited.

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

This post examines recent trademark cases from the Delhi, Calcutta, and Madras High Courts, focusing on injunctions and rectification. The analysis underlines the significance of registration and consistent trademark use for legal protection in India.

Use of Music in Salons and Ads

Recent court decisions have strengthened music copyright enforcement against salons and advertisers in India. Businesses are advised to secure licences or use public domain music to comply with legal requirements.

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

The Madras High Court set aside the refusal of United Foods’ word mark YOYO, allowing amendment to a label mark under Section 91. The matter was remanded for reconsideration, reflecting a practical judicial approach in trademark appeals.

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

The Madras High Court held that a system for selectively concealing physical addresses in e-commerce is not a business method under Section 3k. The decision clarifies the distinction between technological inventions and business method exclusions in Indian patent law.