Same Hair, Same Care, Same Jasmine: Too Familiar for Trade Mark and Copyright Comfort

Same Hair, Same Care, Same Jasmine: Too Familiar for Trade Mark and Copyright Comfort Featured image for article: Same Hair, Same Care, Same Jasmine: Too Familiar for Trade Mark and Copyright Comfort

In the case of Marico Limited vs Minolta Natural Care, the court examined whether the defendants’ Jasmine and Hair Protection hair oil products unlawfully copied the distinctive trade dress, logos, and packaging of the plaintiff’s well known Jasmine and Hair and Care hair oil products sold under the Parachute house mark, and granted interim relief to the plaintiff.

Read more about Same Hair, Same Care, Same Jasmine: Too Familiar for Trade Mark and Copyright Comfort

If You List It, They Might Sue: Trademark Infringement, Place of Business, and Online Access

If You List It, They Might Sue: Trademark Infringement, Place of Business, and Online Access Featured image for article: If You List It, They Might Sue: Trademark Infringement, Place of Business, and Online Access

In the case of Kohinoor Seed Fields India Pvt Ltd vs Veda Seed Sciences Pvt Ltd, the Delhi High Court Division Bench provided a structured analysis of what constitutes territorial jurisdiction in trademark infringement actions after examining the plaintiff’s principal office, online listings, and the role of marketing agreements.

Read more about If You List It, They Might Sue: Trademark Infringement, Place of Business, and Online Access

No Territorial Jurisdiction, No Quia Timet Relief: Lessons from a Patent Case

A stylized laboratory scene showing a large blue capsule being constructed by steampunk-style mechanical arms, with sparks flying. A wooden sign next to the capsule reads "UNDER CONSTRUCTION," symbolizing a drug still in development. Various lab equipment is visible in the background. Featured image for article: No Territorial Jurisdiction, No Quia Timet Relief: Lessons from a Patent Case

In the case of Helsinn Healthcare SA vs AET Laboratories, the Delhi High Court declined to entertain a patent infringement action filed in anticipation of future infringement. The Court examined the territorial reach of Indian courts in web-based patent matters and reaffirmed the principles required to sustain quia timet actions.

Read more about No Territorial Jurisdiction, No Quia Timet Relief: Lessons from a Patent Case

Dhanush v. Nayanthara: Netflix denied an exit pass in copyright violation case

Dhanush v. Nayanthara: Netflix denied an exit pass in copyright violation case Featured image for article: Dhanush v. Nayanthara: Netflix denied an exit pass in copyright violation case

The Madras High Court ruled in favor of Wunderbar Films in its copyright dispute with Netflix over the unauthorized use of behind-the-scenes footage. Netflix’s applications challenging jurisdiction and seeking rejection of the plaint were dismissed. The Court held that territorial jurisdiction was valid, pre-suit mediation was not mandatory due to urgency, and combining statutory and common law remedies was permissible.

Read more about Dhanush v. Nayanthara: Netflix denied an exit pass in copyright violation case