Latest news with #TradeMarksAct
Mint
22-05-2025
- Business
- Mint
Google's AI trademark in India is held by a Telegu TV channel. Grok, ChatGPT and DeepSeek similarly stuck
Google has run into a spot of trouble with regards to its artificial intelligence (AI) platform Gemini, in India, according to a report by Bar and Bench. Notably, regional news and entertainment network Sun TV, owns the trademark rights to Telegu language channel Gemini TV, and has blocked the Silicon valley tech giant's billion dollar Class 9 application. It is not the only AI business, facing a similar hurdle. Elon Musk-led xAI's Grok, Sam Altman-led OpenAI's ChatGPT, and even Chinese player DeepSeek AI's trademark applications in India are being contested by local players, it said. The Indian Trade Marks Registry has either flagged these applications or received formal oppositions from domestic firms who claim prior use, similarity that can cause customer confusion, and bad faith adoption. Notably, Class 9 trademark applications (which is what these companies have applied under) are used for AI programmes, computer software, data processing systems, downloadable software, technological products, and related digital tools, the report added. The trademarks will be examined for potential conflicts under Section 11 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, which deals with relative grounds for refusal. Notably, in India, first use usually outweighs international reputation, the report added. It is notable that Anthropic's AI model Claude successfully secured trademark registration in India in June 2024; and Perplexity AI obtained registration of its trademark 'Perplexity' in September 2024 — both under Class 9, without any recorded opposition. Google's generative AI platform Gemini's trademark has been objected to by Sun TV due to the Telegu channel's existing trademark for Gemini TV. Google in its response has argued that the industries are completely unrelated with no overlap in customer bases — broadcast television compared to AI, software and machine learning, respectively, the report said. Further, it noted that Gemini is a 'globally recognised brand with high visibility in app stores and millions of downloads in India', it pointed to continued promotional campaigns and rebranding efforts from Google Bard. The report also noted that Google cited a precedent from the Supreme Court of India, which has ruled that class overlap is not enough to deny registration when the confusion between the business or products is unlikely. Bengaluru-based Flaxxi AI opposed OpenAI's ChatGPT trademark in India, claiming it has used the name since 2022 for its AI education platform, Bar and Bench report said. The platform was developed in collaboration with IIT Jammu and has recognition in India through its services and marketing, the company claimed. For Grok, Finland's marine navigation software and equipment company Groke Technologies on May 1 opposed the Class 9 application. Elon Musk's company has responded that the companies serve different markets, have disimilar products, and both already coexist in multiple locations (Finland and Korea) where no objections were raised. In DeepSeek's case, at least two other forms have sent overlapping applications for the name, indicating a potential multi-party dispute, the B&B report said. File application under relevant classes. The Trademark registry will examine the application. Areas of dispute are usually flagged under Section 9 (generic or non-distinctive marks) or Section 11 (likelihood of confusion with prior marks) of the Trade Marks Act. The applicant may respond and appear for a hearing if necessary. Advertisement is run in the Trade Marks Journal. Four months of opposition window is activated. The application is registered if there is no opposition.
New Indian Express
21-05-2025
- Business
- New Indian Express
‘Not every Neha can be yours': HC in trademark tussle case
The legal battle was between Sahni Cosmetics (plaintiff), which claimed it had been selling face creams under the 'NEHA' brand since 1990, and Neha Herbals (defendant), which said it had been doing mehendi and herbal stuff since 1992. Sahni sought to cancel Neha Herbals' trademark rights altogether. But the court wasn't buying it, as Sahni couldn't provide proper evidence, no invoices, no steady trademark records, and not even a nostalgic '90s TV ad to prove their point. 'Trademark rights do not arise in the abstract... rather, those rights accrue through tangible trading and commercial activities that identify the origin of products or services to the consumers,' read the order. 'While plaintiffs' goodwill in the trademark 'NEHA' is established, it remains confined to the domain of mehendi and herbal hair-care preparations. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that such goodwill extended to creams or general cosmetics before the institution of the suit,' the court said. The court said the defendant has failed to discharge the burden of proving prior use in terms of the products for which the plaintiff has registration or any statutory ground under Sections 47 or 57 of the Trade Marks Act to warrant cancellation.
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Yahoo
Shop owner sold illegal tobacco as well as vapes to underage children
A shop owner sold illegal tobacco as well as vapes and alcohol to underage children. Following an investigation by East Sussex Trading Standards, Lhon Karimi, 29, of Devonshire Road in Hastings, was sentenced to 12 weeks imprisonment, suspended for 12 months, given a £230 fine and ordered to pay £500 costs at Hastings Magistrates Court on April 24. The offences, which took place in 2023 and 2024, concerned illegal tobacco and cigarettes offered for sale as well as underage alcohol and vape sales at Karimi's shop Delboys in Castle Street in Hastings. East Sussex Trading Standards inspected the premises in May 2023 after a child test purchaser was able to buy a can of cider from the store. Counterfeit cigarettes and cigarettes and tobacco in non-standardised packaging were discovered. Hidden vapes found by the inspectors (Image: ESCC) A packet of illegal cigarettes was also sold by Karimi to an adult test purchaser in September 2023. A second inspection of the shop in April 2024, following the sale of an illegal over capacity vape to a child test purchaser the week before, resulted in the discovery of more illegal cigarettes. After initially pleading not guilty to all the charges put to him at court appearances throughout 2024, Karimi changed his plea at the start of his trial in December last year. Karimi pleaded guilty to five counts of breaching the Trade Marks Act, two counts of supplying tobacco in non-standardised packaging and one count each of breaching the Licensing Act and breaching the Children and Families Act. At the sentencing hearing last month, the court noted there was 'some ignorance and naivety' on Karimi's part and that he pleaded guilty once he understood the offence. Hidden cigarettes and tobacco in the shop (Image: ESCC) READ MORE: Constance Marten calls time on her evidence on her baby girl's death The court also made an order for the forfeiture and destruction of all the stock seized. Councillor Penny di Cara, the county council's lead member for economy, said: 'Whilst this case has taken some time to reach a conclusion, hopefully the prosecution and conviction will make it clear we will pursue offenders through the courts. 'We take the supply of illegal tobacco very seriously. The sale of cheap tobacco is widely acknowledged to negatively affect communities and encourage smoking among young people due to cheaper prices, as well as undermining the efforts of stop smoking services. 'The sale of alcohol and vapes to our young people is unacceptable and potentially exposes them to the addiction and health risks associated with the underage use of nicotine and alcohol.'
New Indian Express
14-05-2025
- Business
- New Indian Express
Delhi HC restrains use of ‘Max Mueller' by entity
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has granted an interim injunction in favour of the Goethe-Institut, a German cultural association operating six educational centres across India under the name 'Max Mueller Bhavan'. The order stops another entity from using the name 'Max Mueller Institute' to offer German language education. Justice Mini Pushkarna, while delivering the order on May 6, said, '...in the area of education, any chance of confusion should be completely avoided. The use of identical names for two institutions imparting education would result in enormous confusion, resulting in damaging effect.' The Court observed that Goethe-Institut has been using the name since 1957, while the opposing party adopted the mark only in 2018. Although the defendants claimed to hold a registered trademark, the Court reaffirmed that under Section 34 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, a prior user's rights take precedence over a registered trademark. 'The fact that the mark of a party is not registered is no bar to a case for passing off, if the ingredients of passing off are established,' the Court said while granting interim relief. The defendants argued that Goethe-Institut uses its German name officially and that 'Max Mueller Bhavan' refers only to a building, not a trademark. However, the plaintiff countered that the name is closely tied to their educational services in India and is widely recognised. Supporting this, the Court noted that documents like newspaper reports, MoUs and social media evidence all showed that 'Max Mueller Bhavan' has consistently been used as a brand name. It also remarked, 'The mark MAX MUELLER BHAVAN is prominently displayed outside the institutes of the plaintiff in India…Even the Government of India recognises the plaintiff's institutes in India, as MAX MUELLER BHAVAN…' The Court concluded that the defendant's name could mislead the public.
New Indian Express
14-05-2025
- Business
- New Indian Express
KFC moves Delhi HC to challenge ‘Nashville Fried Chicken' trademark
NEW DELHI: Fast food giant Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) has approached the Delhi High Court to challenge Massive Restaurants Private Limited's attempt to trademark the name 'Nashville Fried Chicken'. KFC has filed both a rectification application and a legal suit against the company, which runs Nashville Fried Chicken (NFC) as well as several popular restaurant chains such as Farzi Cafe, Pa Pa Ya, Masala Library, and Louis Burger. During the hearing, Justice Amit Bansal issued a notice to Massive Restaurants and asked them to respond. The next hearing is scheduled for May 28. KFC's lawyer, Shwetashree Majumder, argued that the name NFC is too similar to KFC and could easily mislead the public. She explained that both brands sell fried chicken, and people might wrongly assume they are linked. Majumder also pointed out that the Delhi High Court had previously stopped other businesses from using 'FC' when selling fried chicken. She referred to a 2024 ruling where the court ordered a brand called 'Ali Fried Chicken' to change its name following KFC's complaint. She further claimed that KFC should be given stronger legal protection as a 'well-known trademark'. According to Indian law (Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999), a well-known trademark is one that is widely recognised by a large section of the public. If someone else uses the name on unrelated products or services, it might cause confusion. Majumder said KFC clearly fits this definition because of its long-standing presence and strong advertising. KFC, which came to India in 1995, now runs over 600 outlets across the country. Its red-and-white branding, the face of Colonel Sanders, and the slogan 'finger lickin' good' are familiar to many Indians, especially in cities. The company owns many registered trademarks in India that cover a range of products and services. Although the Registrar has not officially listed KFC as a 'well-known trademark' under Section 11(6), Indian courts have often treated major global brands like KFC as well-known when handling trademark disputes.
