BananaIP is hiring a Senior Trademark Associate for its Bengaluru office. The position is intended for professionals with at least 5 years of direct trademark experience who can manage clients, guide teams, and handle a wide range of Indian and international trademark matters. The role also values comfort with technology and the responsible use of AI tools to support better quality and efficient delivery in trademark practice.
Read more about Senior Trademark Associate Opening for Professionals with 5+ Years of Trademark ExperienceCategory: Trademarks
10 Day IP Practice Courses to Build Practice Ready Professionals for an AI Enabled Practice
Many students and professionals study intellectual property law, but only a few receive training that prepares them for actual practice. To help bridge this gap, Intellepedia’s education and training team of experienced IP attorneys is seeking interest in proposed 10 day capsular courses designed to create practice ready IP attorneys and practitioners for an AI enabled practice.
Read more about 10 Day IP Practice Courses to Build Practice Ready Professionals for an AI Enabled PracticeCaptcha Blocks, Accessibility Knocks: Will CGPDTM Open the Door?
In the case of Masoom Reza v. The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks, the dispute centred on whether the IP Office Trade Marks filing and search systems could be used in a meaningful way by a person with disability. The complaint challenged inaccessible CAPTCHA features, the lack of effective alternatives, and the resulting denial of equal access to essential online services. The court examined the statutory duties governing digital accessibility and issued detailed corrective directions. This order follows the Karnataka High Court judgement in Dr Kalyan C. Kankanala v. Union of India, where the Office of the CGPDTM filed an affidavit stating that it had issued accessibility and reasonable accommodation guidelines and would make its websites accessible to persons with disabilities.
Read more about Captcha Blocks, Accessibility Knocks: Will CGPDTM Open the Door?Seeing Red: Calcutta High Court Upholds Exide’s Trade Dress Injunction Against Amaron
Can a battery brand spend years telling consumers that red means Exide, and then quietly launch its own red product line? The Calcutta High Court’s Division Bench says no, upholding Exide’s interim injunction against Amaron maker Amara Raja in a significant trade dress passing off ruling.
Read more about Seeing Red: Calcutta High Court Upholds Exide’s Trade Dress Injunction Against AmaronCan Non-Use of a Trademark Fuel a Passing Off Claim? Delhi High Court Says No
The Delhi High Court dismissed Sana Herbals’ appeal for an interim injunction against Mohsin Dehlvi and Dehlvi Remedies, holding that prior user of the NOKUF trademark by the respondents, even if followed by decades of non-use, defeats a passing off claim where goodwill never preceded the defendant’s adoption of the mark.
Read more about Can Non-Use of a Trademark Fuel a Passing Off Claim? Delhi High Court Says NoKENT can’t do it! Court proves it’s not a big FAN of Kent’s Brand Stretch, backs prior use
In the case of Kent Ro Systems Limited v. Kent Cables Private Limited, two businesses using the same mark KENT clashed over who could sell fans under that mark. One side relied on its strong reputation in water purifiers and home appliances. The other relied on earlier adoption of KENT for electrical goods and evidence of fan sales over several years. The Division Bench upheld the interim restraint against Kent RO and left the final rights to be decided at trial.
Read more about KENT can’t do it! Court proves it’s not a big FAN of Kent’s Brand Stretch, backs prior useVolkswagen vs Maruti Suzuki: When MOTION met TRANSFORMOTION, Similarity missed the bus!
In the case of Volkswagen AG v. The Registrar of Trade Marks and Anr., Volkswagen opposed Maruti Suzuki’s application for TRANSFORMOTION in Class 12 on the ground that it was too close to Volkswagen’s earlier mark 4MOTION. The court examined the marks in the setting in which they were used, noted that one was tied to a vehicle technology and the other to an advertising campaign, and concluded that the two marks did not create deceptive similarity.
Read more about Volkswagen vs Maruti Suzuki: When MOTION met TRANSFORMOTION, Similarity missed the bus!Can Anyone Own the “Forest”? Delhi High Court Applies Anti Dissection Rule in Forest Essentials case
The Delhi High Court recently refused to grant an interim injunction in the dispute between Forest Essentials and Baby Forest Ayurveda. The court held that “BABY FOREST” was not deceptively similar to “FOREST ESSENTIALS,” and that the word **“FOREST,” being a dictionary word, could not be monopolised without strong evidence of secondary meaning. Applying the anti dissection rule, the court concluded that the marks must be assessed as a whole and declined to interfere with the Single Judge’s refusal of interim relief.
Read more about Can Anyone Own the “Forest”? Delhi High Court Applies Anti Dissection Rule in Forest Essentials caseDead Company Dead Mark: Trademark cannot survive a Non Existent Owner or unrecorded trademark assignment
In the case of Tibbs Food Private Limited vs D Lite Frankies and Foods Private Limited, the petitioner sought removal of a trademark registered for “D Lite Frankies and Foods Private Limited.” During the proceedings it came to light that the registered proprietor company had already been struck off, and the trademark had allegedly been assigned to an individual years earlier. The court had to decide whether the registration could continue in the name of a non existent company and what effect the unrecorded assignment would have.
Read more about Dead Company Dead Mark: Trademark cannot survive a Non Existent Owner or unrecorded trademark assignmentOLIVE Trademark Case: Delhi High Court on Section 11 & Prior User Rights
Featured image for article: OLIVE Trademark Case: Delhi High Court on Section 11 & Prior User Rights
Delhi High Court refuses OLIVE trademark in Class 35, holding similarity with Class 25 marks and lack of proven prior user rights under Section 11.
Read more about OLIVE Trademark Case: Delhi High Court on Section 11 & Prior User Rights