IPRMENTLAW WEEKLY HIGHLIGHTS (AUGUST 1-7)

Delhi High Court says KHADI trademark cannot be used [Khadi & Village Industries Commission v. Raman Gupta & Ors.]

The Delhi High Court recently said that defendants using logo of Charkha and trademark Khadi by Heritage cannot be condoned. The Delhi High Court further said that sale of PPE Kits, hand sanitizers, masks etc. by Khadi by Heritage using the logo of Charkha would result in irreparable loss to the plaintiff. Consequently, the Court awarded damages to the plaintiff amounting to Rs. 10 lakhs and Rs. 2 lakhs as costs to the plaintiff as the defendants were infringing upon the plaintiff’s registered trademark.

Theos v. Theobroma: Delhi High Court helps the parties to amicably settle the trademark dispute

The two popular confectionary brands reached an amicable settlement over the use of trademark THEOS. While helping the brands to reach a settlement certain terms and conditions were set out by the Hon’ble Court. For instance, Theobroma shall be free to expand its business across the country. Theos shall not be allowed to make any online sales outside the Delhi-NCR region under the mark THEOS.

Read judgment here.

Delhi High Court grants Interim Injunction against Flipkart

The Delhi High Court while passing an interim injunction against E-commerce giant, Flipkart said that a third-party seller cannot be permitted to ‘latch on’ to a Best Seller’s name or trademark. This is because this amounts to ‘riding piggyback’, constituting passing off. Thus, it was held by the Court that Flipkart allowed third-party sellers to latch on the Plaintiff’s trademark and shall be liable to be taken down. Further, the Court directed Flipkart to ensure that this feature of latching on is disabled by the website before the next date of hearing.

Read order here.

Delhi Court says that there is no copyright in teachings of Quran while dismissing a copyright infringement suit

The Islamic Book Service (P) Ltd. filed a copyright infringement suit before the Delhi High Court over the publication of a book titled ‘Islamic Studies’. The Court while dismissing the infringement suit filed by the plaintiff held that there cannot be any copyrights on word Islam or Studies. The Court further said that the plaintiff has miserably failed to prove that it had any copyright over the book ‘Islamic Studies’. It also failed to show that the defendant committed any infringement of copyright.

Kerala High Court says that the conditions set by CBFC for theatrical release should be complied for OTT release as well

The Kerala High Court while considering a plea challenging the release of an un-altered version of the movie, Kaduva on OTT platforms which was otherwise released in theatres with an altered version said that the conditions set out by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for the theatrical release of a film, should also be complied with when the film is streamed on Over-the-Top Platforms. The Court further said that even when the OTT rights are sold of a movie and the CBFC had issued directions, then also compliance with the said directions should be made.

Centre withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019

The Centre recently withdrew the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, in the Lok Sabha. Union Minister for Electronics and Information Technology, Ashwini Vaishnav passed a motion in the Lok Sabha to withdraw the said Bill. The motion was passed with a voice-vote and the bill was consequently withdrawn. Ashwini Vaishnav further said that keeping in mind the amendments a new legislation shall be introduced that will fit into the comprehensive legal framework.

US Internet service provider Bright House has reached settlement at the very last minute in ISP copyright litigation

Bright House, a US internet service provider has reached a settlement at the very last minute with the major record companies resulting in halt of the latest court battle set to test the responsibilities and liabilities of net firms when it comes to policing piracy online. The case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning that the litigation cannot be revived in future.