This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
We are pleased to bring you a guest post from Payal Saraogi, on a recent decision of the Delhi High Court on Google’s use of trademarks as advertisement keywords. Payal has graduated from the School of Law, Christ University in 2020, and currently practices as a disputes lawyer. Confusion caused by Google’s keyword policy.
The law firm claims it has been using a black and silver color scheme to promote its services since its inception in 2012. According to the letter, the NFL claims that Dimopoulos used hashtags, including the Raiders’ marks, and engaged in other unauthorized use of their marks.
On November 7 th , Conde Nast sued Drake and 21 Savage for $4 million for false advertising and infringing Vogue’s trademarks. Erik Pelton® has been making trademarks bloom since 1999 ® as the founder of Erik M. Pelton & Associates ®, a boutique trademarklaw firm in Falls Church, Virginia. 2012: [link].
This case comes in when the Retrolympics applied for the word and the figurative mark Retroolympic at the German Patent and Trademark Office in 2012 (for Nice classes 28 (games and sporting goods); 35 (advertising) and 41 (sporting and cultural activities).
com” at after a generic word, “Booking,” still makes “Booking.com” generic within traditional trademarklaw [xiv] and (2) the fact consumer identify “Booking.com” doesn’t change the fact that it is still generic and thus ineligible for trademark registration. [xv] 1013, 1015-1016 (2012). xxix] Robert C. Bird & Joel H.
Slogans are brief, memorable words that are commonly used in advertising to promote a specific company. Companies seek to protect the value of their trademarks since they can be quite valuable to the brand. Using a mark as an advertising slogan, on the other hand, does not prevent it from being registered as a trademark.
In the 2012-2015 period, Respondent’s domestic sales, measured in dollar amounts, were in the five-to-six figure range annually. "The term 'use in commerce' means the bona fide use of a mark in the ordinary course of trade, and not made merely to reserve a right in a mark." Lanham Act, Section 45.
He was unmistakably aware of the nuances regarding colours in trademarklaw. Broadly speaking, trademarks are of two types: traditional and non-traditional. [1] Notwithstanding the essence of this finding, this is too narrow an interpretation of the true spirit of trademarklaw. Anubaker CS (COMM) No.890/2018
The book, a follow on edition from the 2012 1st edition of Overlapping IP Rights is once again a masterclass in thinking through the oft under discussed spheres of overlaps in IP, this time with additional subject areas and updated developments.
In Europe and the United States at least, every trademark has at least three purposes: (1) It identifies the origin of a product or service; (2) It guarantees consistent quality of that good or service; (3) It serves as symbolic communication as a basis for publicity and advertising.
Consumer rights abuses, deceptive advertising, and unfair commercial practices are examples. However, it may be more appropriate to consider trademarklaw as a comparable framework for comprehending the extent of the personality right. National Law School of India Review , 31 (1), 125–148. link] Luthra, S.
Aditya Gupta is a lawyer by training and is presently working on issues that fall at the intersection of IP law, freedom of expression, and business strategy. His primary focus is on trademarklaw and the intersection of finance and social networks. Vijay V Venkitesh is a data scientist and Research Associate at IIMA.
Through various case laws, the scope of publicity rights has been expanded by the Indian judiciary. The Trade Marks Act, 1999 governs trademarklaw in India and provides for the registration, protection, and enforcement of trademarks. Under this Act, Sec. For instance, in Titan Industries Ltd.
Although “third parties have used Flora-Bama in the titles of third parties’ artistic works with Plaintiffs’ oral or written permission,” that doesn’t make this a title-v-title case: Basic trademarklaw demonstrates why. This justification is at least consistent with the core idea of trademarklaw. Grimaldi, 875 F.2d
In an October 2012 post, Kruttika Vijay highlighted the Supreme Court’s concerns over the lack of transparency in clinical trials in India. Only then does Google need to take action against the advertisement and not otherwise. ruling on Indian businesses and trademark holders? Whither Clinical Trial Data?:
The Court reasoned that when the Act was amended in 2012 – internet broadcasting was not alien to India and if the Legislature intended Section 31D to apply to internet broadcasting, it would’ve done so by specifically amending the provision. Ltd and Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. Music Broadcast Ltd. Bolt Technology v.
Both suits were filed before the 2012 amendment to the Copyright Act. Further, given that the 2012 amendment does not have a retrospective effect, the Court held that the amendment has no effect on the legal position. Merck Sharp and Dohme v. SMS Pharmaceuticals [Delhi High Court].
Panel #2, TM, moderated by Vice Dean Felix Wu Jack Daniels says that use as a trademark is special: like copyright’s bête noire, confusion caused by trademark use is the central concern of trademarklaw. Tam and Brunetti, striking down various bars on registration. Then, in Lexmark v.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content