Latest news with #TradeMarksAct
New Indian Express
7 days ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Trust moves Madras HC against party flag of TVK
CHENNAI: A charitable trust has moved the Madras HC against actor Vijay and his party TVK alleging trademark and copyright violation for using the flag which is 'identical and deceptively similar' to its registered flag and logo. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, before whom the civil suit by Thondai Mondala Sandror Dharma Paribalana Sabai came up for hearing, issued notice to Vijay and TVK directing to file a counter-affidavit in two weeks. When the judge questioned whether the Trade Marks Act would be applicable for a political party's flag, the petitioner's counsel Ramesh Ganapathy submitted the Act would apply not only for goods and commercial service but also to the service of the trusts. The trust sought the court to issue an injunction restraining Vijay and his party from using the flag. The judge said, 'The larger question of whether the issue falls under the Trade Marks Act has to be examined.' The plaintiff-trust submitted it has been using the trademark flag and logo since 2023 for providing social services. The trust alleged TVK has adopted the colour combination of red and yellow, specifically with three stripes with red on top and bottom and yellow in the middle and the circle design in the middle of the flag, to ride over the hard-earned goodwill and reputation of the trust.
The Citizen
08-07-2025
- Business
- The Citizen
Did the Viljoens of Tammy Taylor-fame skip the country?
It seems that Peet and Melany Viljoen are now living in the US, with him urging white South Africans to join him there. Did Peet and Melany Viljoen of Tammy Taylor franchise fame really skip the country? It seems like they did if you look at Peet Viljoen's latest video on Instagram, where he makes various racist statements and urges white people to follow him to the US. Peet Viljoen and his wife, Melany, have been in the news for the past few years after various people accused them of selling Tammy Taylor franchises that never materialised. Some of these complainants won their court cases against the Viljoens. In the latest court case that The Citizen reported on, North Gauteng High Court judge, Joseph Raulinga ordered that the Viljoens must pay back the R600 000 a woman paid for a Tammy Taylor franchise. He also declared the transaction unconscionable, unjust and unreasonable in terms of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), and void. He also ordered that Tammy Taylor Global Franchising, as well as both the Viljoens, 'immediately cease representing or holding out to the public that they have the legal authority and right to sell Tammy Taylor nail franchises in South Africa, without authorisation under the Trade Marks Act.' In addition, he ordered that they remove all references to Tammy Taylor from their websites, stationery, forms, marketing material, salon products, and social media platforms within 30 days from 25 April. Raulinga also ordered the registrar of the court to forward a copy of the order and all the papers to the National Prosecuting Authority. The Hawks confirmed to The Citizen that it is investigating. ALSO READ: Tammy Taylor Global Franchising gets a big hiding in South African high court Viljoens earlier denied they are leaving SA Private investigator Mike Bolhuis said in May, just after news of the latest judgment against the Viljoens became public, that he received information indicating that the Viljoens planned to evade justice by moving to the United States of America. In response, Peet Viljoen told Rapport that they are not leaving the country and that they are simply going on holiday to Perth in Australia where they will open a franchise. He said that they had no intention to leave South Africa permanently and even provided 'evidence' in the form of copies of plane tickets to Perth. However, this past Sunday, Viljoen told Rapport that he has in fact left South Africa for the US and that he has no intention of returning to South Africa. Rapport referred to – now deleted – statements Peet made on his Instagram account. According to Rapport, his original video included the statement: 'I don't speak baboon anymore,' and the assertion that he left South Africa for the US due to South Africa's racial laws and the 'inferior mental capacity of the black person in South Africa'. ALSO READ: WATCH: Real Tammy Taylor says Peet and Melany Viljoen stole her identity Viljoen says they moved to US for safety reasons In addition, he claimed he moved to America because he fears for his safety in South Africa, citing the EFF and its leader Julius Malema in several claims. It seems that these claims have been edited out later as it is not on his account anymore, while the post shows that it has been edited. However, there are videos on his Instagram and TikTok accounts where he talks at length about leaving South Africa to live in the US and offering to help South Africans who want to move there, as he believes there is no future for the white man in the country. This is his video on Instagram: This is his video on TikTok: But Bolhuis says the Viljoens are planning to use the current political climate between South Africa and the US as an excuse to evade justice for crimes they committed in South Africa. 'It is clear from Viljoen's statements that he is attempting to provoke a public response from the EFF and other anti-racism activist groups, with the hope of using it to appeal to the US government that his life could be in danger if he returns to South Africa. 'This is a sly and corrupt way of obtaining and using refugee status to evade justice in South Africa.' According to Bolhuis, the Viljoens sold their assets in South Africa and lied about their intentions to leave the country by claiming they were merely taking a holiday in Australia. ALSO READ: Real Tammy Taylor owns her trademark, not the Viljoens – expert Viljoen says he is an attorney despite being disbarred Viljoen also says in his TikTok video that he is a South African attorney who moved to America for his own safety, although he was debarred in South Africa. On his X profile he describes himself as a 'law broker' who 'uses his legal expertise to help people find the right lawyer'. In a post on another platform, he claims to be the first law broker in South Africa. According to Bolhuis, a warrant of arrest will soon be issued for them, which he says is the main reason for their departure from South Africa. 'If the Viljoens succeed in evading justice by finding refuge in America, this will set a standard and it will open the door for widespread corruption and many similar cases will soon follow. 'They must return to South Africa and face justice for their actions.' Bolhuis is warning the South African and American public not to fall victim to Viljoen's manipulation. 'He is well-spoken and he knows how to appear sincere. There is a good reason why Viljoen has been the centre of several controversies surrounding his business dealings over the years. 'He uses manipulation and sophistication to draw victims into conducting business with him. Once the victims discover that he is not adhering to his end of the agreement, he turns to intimidation, extortion and threats to convince his victims not to file or to withdraw criminal charges against him.'
IOL News
03-07-2025
- Business
- IOL News
Trademark dispute: Burton's Foods vs. Boxer Superstores over 'Wheels' branding
Burton's Foods, which sells biscuits under the branding Wagon Wheels, turned to court to stop a competitor also using the branding Wheels on its biscuit packaging. Image: Online The wording 'Wheels' in relation to biscuits came under the legal spotlight after a company selling biscuits under the name 'Wagon Wheels' objected to a competitor wanting to register its biscuits using the name 'Wheels' on its packaging. Burton's Foods (applicant) turned to the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, as it is opposing two trademark applications filed by Boxer Superstores (respondent) under the Trade Marks Act, to enable it to use the word 'Wheels' on its biscuits. The applicant asked the court for an order refusing the respondent's trademark applications and directing that the trademark applications be removed from the register. The applicant's opposition is premised on the contention that the respondent's trademark is highly similar to theirs, and that it covers goods that are identical, or at least highly similar. For that reason, the applicant said, the use of the respondent's trademark would lead to confusion or deception among consumers, as the trademarks are so similar. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Judge Jan Swanepoel remarked that, upon closer scrutiny, the applicant's complaint is really against the use of the word 'Wheels'. The applicant told the court that its 'Wagon Wheels' trademark contains the word 'Wheels', which retains an independent identity within the composite mark 'Wagon Wheels'. It said its trademark and the opposed trademark applications are visually similar in that they both contain the word 'Wheels'. But the judge said the applicant cannot claim rights in the individual words contained in the composite trademark. The question is not whether the word 'Wheels' is identical in each mark, but whether the trademark 'Wagon Wheels' is so similar to the trademark 'Wheels' as to cause deception or confusion. The applicant's trademark is registered simply as Wagon 'Wheels', with no description as to colour or design. The respondent's trademark carries a specific design in specific colours, namely yellow, black, and white. Visually, the two marks are quite distinct from one another, the judge said.
Time of India
01-07-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Delhi High Court revives Crocs' passing off petition against Bata, Liberty, others
The Delhi High Court has reinstated Crocs Inc's lawsuit against Bata India and other Indian footwear brands. Crocs alleges these companies are imitating the design of its foam clogs. The court overturned a previous order dismissing Crocs' petitions. It stated Crocs deserves a chance to prove its claims of passing off. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The division bench of the Delhi High Court on Tuesday revived Crocs Inc. USA's passing off petition filed against domestic footwear companies Liberty Shoes and others for allegedly manufacturing and selling footwear identical in shape and design to that of the Crocs' unique trade dress.A bench comprising Justices Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul set aside a single judge's February 18, 2019 order that had dismissed Crocs' five petitions as non-maintainable.'We do not think that this issue could have straightaway been decided by a mere reading of the plaint," the division bench said, adding Croc would have to be given an opportunity to establish that its claim for passing off was not based merely on copying, or imitation, of its registered design by domestic to the DB, passing off was a "sui generis common law remedy', aimed at protecting one's hard-earned goodwill and reputation from others who may deceitfully seek to capitalize on it. Passing off in trademark law refers to the act of one party misrepresenting their goods or services as those of another, leading to consumer confusion and potential harm to the other party's reputation and business, it Inc, USA had moved the HC alleging that a number of Indian footwear companies including Bata India Relaxo Footwear , Action Shoes, Aqualite, and Bioworld Merchandising had passed off products by imitating its distinct look of its foam clogs. It said that these India companies copied the overall structure and perforated pattern of its clogs, which are distinct and unique to its trade Crocs was the proprietor of the design in respect of its footwear in 2004, it did not possess any registration of the given trade dress as a trademark under the Trade Marks Act, Indian firms' adoption of the trade dress in respect of identical goods was dishonest, malafide and fraudulent, Crocs claimed in its petitions, adding that 'unwary purchasers in market and trade are being deceived and defrauded as to the origin of the goods and business. The defendant's gains are the plaintiffs losses.'Besides adoption of the trade dress, they have also blatantly copied the essential and striking features of plaintiffs' design and there malafide and dishonesty is apparent, manifest and striking, Crocs argued.
Pink Villa
30-06-2025
- Sport
- Pink Villa
MS Dhoni wins online application to trademark his nickname 'Captain Cool' and invites hilarious memes
On June 16, 2025, the Trademarks Registry published Mahendra Singh Dhoni's application for the trademark 'Captain Cool,' the sobriquet fans have long linked with his level-headed leadership. Filed under Class 41 for sports coaching and training services, the application initially faced an objection over potential confusion with an existing mark. But Dhoni's legal team successfully argued that 'Captain Cool' has acquired a distinct secondary meaning through his storied career, from the 2007 T20 World Cup conquest to the 2011 ODI World Cup victory. Now accepted and advertised, the registered trademark begins a new chapter in Dhoni's commercial ventures. Captain Cool's trademark journey: The fan chant is now legally his Dhoni first filed for the 'Captain Cool' trademark in June 2023, seeking exclusive rights for sports training centres and coaching services. As per Dhoni's lawyer, Mansi Aggarwal's LinkedIn post, the Registry had initially raised an objection under Section 11(1) of the Trade Marks Act, warning that a similar mark on record might confuse consumers. However, Aggarwal had countered that the nickname's long-standing use by media and fans creates an unmistakable link to Dhoni's persona. 'The phrase 'CAPTAIN COOL' has acquired a distinct secondary meaning through long-standing and widespread association with Mr. Dhoni,' Aggarwal asserted. The Registry agreed, noting that the trademark is unlikely to mislead when used in sports and entertainment contexts. News of the successful trademark filing unleashed a tidal wave of memes and jibes on social media. Fans mocked up product ideas—'Captain Cool Janghiye' spice blend and 'Captain Cool Agarbatti' incense—while some questioned Dhoni's motives. Supporters pointed out that Class 41 covers training and entertainment, hinting at a potential Dhoni-run academy. With 'Captain Cool' now protected, Dhoni can leverage the name for branded coaching camps or sports merchandise without risk of infringement. As Dhoni's post-retirement ventures expand, securing 'Captain Cool' cements the nickname's place in both cricket lore and commerce. Fans can now expect official 'Captain Cool' academies and training programmes bearing the legend's distinctive brand. For Dhoni, the title Captain Cool is not just legendary—it's legally his.
