Delhi High Court | Intellepedia

‘Acquired Distinctiveness’ of Infosys Trademark

The Delhi High Court recognised acquired distinctiveness in the INFOSYS trademark, restraining the defendant from using the mark in its business name. The case highlights the need for strong trademark protection to safeguard a company’s goodwill and reputation.

Zippo Manufacturing Company v. Anil Moolchandani & Ors. , High Court of Delhi

The Delhi High Court ruled in favour of Zippo Manufacturing, granting a permanent injunction against the sale of counterfeit lighters infringing its trademark. The Court recognized the distinctiveness of Zippo’s lighter design and awarded damages to the plaintiff.

Who Owns the Castle?

The Delhi High Court addressed a trademark passing off dispute over the CASTLE mark in the beer industry. The court granted an injunction to the plaintiffs, preventing the defendants from using the marks CASTLE and OLDCASTLE, emphasising the importance of protection against misrepresentation.

Can God’s Name be Monopolized? ‘No’ Says the Court

The Delhi High Court found that KRISHNA, as a deity’s name commonly linked to dairy products, cannot be monopolized as a trademark. The judgment highlighted the absence of secondary distinctiveness and set clear boundaries for trademark claims on religious names.

D.M. Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. v. Baby Gift House and Ors.

The Delhi High Court’s decision in D.M. Entertainment v. Baby Gift House clarified the contours of the right of publicity in India. The case involved unauthorized commercial use of Daler Mehndi’s persona, resulting in findings of infringement, false endorsement, and passing off.

Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. v. Super Cassette Industries Ltd.

The case examines whether the Copyright Board can issue interim orders and fix royalties in ongoing disputes under Section 31 of the Copyright Act. The court affirmed the Board’s authority, emphasising the need for interim relief to prevent irreparable harm during lengthy litigation.

SAP Aktiengesellschaft & Anr (Plaintiff) Vs. Sadiq Pasha, Proprietor, M/s Neologik India

The Delhi High Court restrained Neologik India from using pirated SAP software and awarded punitive damages for copyright infringement. This decision highlights the judiciary’s strict approach to commercial software piracy and the significance of punitive damages in such cases.

Sholay Media and Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd. and Ors.

The Delhi High Court addressed copyright assignment and royalty issues in the Sholay ringtone case involving Vodafone. The Court denied an injunction but established conditions to protect the copyright holders’ interests. This judgement clarifies digital media exploitation and royalty rights under Indian copyright law.

Trademark Registration: Prima Facie Evidence of Validity?

The Delhi High Court has held that trademark registration does not automatically serve as prima facie evidence of validity. This decision, particularly impacting descriptive marks, invites scrutiny of Section 31 of the Trademarks Act 1999 and its practical effects.

Rejection of Application Based on Pre-Grant Representation May Be Appealed to IPAB

The Delhi High Court has clarified that appeals to the IPAB are permitted when a patent application is rejected based on pre-grant representation. This judgment offers clear recourse for patent applicants and settles the legal position on such appeals under Indian patent law.