Delhi High Court observed that Google cannot absolve itself from the liability of ensuring that the keywords used are not an infringement of a trademark
An application was moved by DR Logistics before the Delhi High Court, seeking an interim ex-parte injunction against Google India, Google LLC and Just Dial, restraining them from using or permitting third parties to use the applicant’s registered trademarks DRS LOGISTICS or AGARWAL PACKERS &MOVES either as a keyword or as a meta tag or as a trademark.
While dealing with the application the question that arose before the Court was whether “providing a trademark of an owner as a keyword to a third party would amount to infringement of a trademark?”
After hearing arguments from both the sides, the Hon’ble Court observed that an infringement of a trademark can be by way of spoken use which is different from printed or visual representations of the mark and an invisible use of the mark can also result in infringement of a trademark.
Further, the Court observed that Google cannot absolve itself from the liability of ensuring that the keywords used are not an infringement of a trademark. Moreover, it was held that use of a trademark as keywords amounts to use as provided under the Trade Marks Act.
Read order here.
Delhi High Court observed that in cases of Internet Trademark Infringements, it must be established that the foreign defendants had the intent to target Indian customers
A suit was filed by Tata Sons Private Limited before the Delhi High Court seeking permanent injunction against the defendants from using the trademark ‘TATA’ for their crypto currency. While dealing with the said case, the question that arose for consideration was “whether the plaintiff can seek an injunction against the defendants’ mark, the defendants being located outside the sovereign borders of India and, therefore, statutorily outside the reach of the Trademarks Act, 1999, as well as the Code of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)?”
The Hon’ble High Court while answering the above-mentioned question observed that in case of Internet Trademark infringement, it must be established that the foreign defendants had the intent to target Indian customers and market.
Read order here.
Bombay High Court restrains sale of autobiography of former Chairperson of Raymond- Vijaypat Singhania
A petition was filed before the Bombay High Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India against Singhania, Macmillan Publishers India Private Limited and Amazon India Limited. The said petition was filed by Raymond Limited, headed by Singhania’s son, Gautam Singhania.
It was alleged in the petition that the autobiography was “surreptitiously” released on November 01 although there was an injunction on its release. While hearing the petition, the Hon’ble Court restrained the sale and distribution of the autobiography of former Chairperson of Raymond- Vijaypat Singhania.
Read order here.
Bombay High Court reiterates that there is no copyright in an idea (Tarun Wadhwa v. Saregama India Ltd & Anr).
An independent filmmaker Tarun Wadhwa filed a copyright infringement suit before the Bombay High Court claiming that Saregama had used his material illicitly to make a Marathi film on Zombies called Zombivli. The Bombay High Court, however, refused to restrain the release of the said film reiterating the well settled principle of there being no copyright in an idea.
Read order here.
All India Film Chamber of Commerce applies for registration as a Copyright Society under Section 33
The Copyright Office vide public notice dated October 27, 2021, notified that the All India Film Chamber of Commerce (AIFCC) has filed an application for registration as a copyright society under Section 33 of the Copyright Act, 1957 for carrying out business of issuing or granting license in respect of creative works i.e., literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works incorporated in cinematograph films or sound recordings.
Read our detailed post here.
