Search Indian IP Case Law
Judgments of the Supreme Court and the High Courts on patents, trade marks, copyright, designs and geographical indications — organised by Act and section, each with a link to the judgment on the court’s website.
7 results
for “Dilution”
Anil Kapoor v. Simply Life India & Ors.
A celebrity's personality and publicity rights, reinforced by the constitutional right to privacy, protect against unauthorised commercial exploitation of name, image, voice and likeness, including through emerging technologies su…
AI And DeepfakesDomain NamesDynamic InjunctionPersonality RightsTrade MarksDaimler Benz Aktiegesellschaft & Anr. v. Hybo Hindustan
A trade mark that has attained an extraordinary worldwide reputation is entitled to protection against use on entirely unrelated goods, since such unauthorised use dilutes and demeans the distinctiveness of the mark; delay or hone…
Delay And AcquiescenceDilutionPassing OffTrademark InfringementTrade MarksHamdard National Foundation (India) & Anr. v. Sadar Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.
While composite trade marks must be compared as a whole under the anti-dissection rule, it is permissible to examine a dominant or significant common element in determining the overall commercial impression, and a composite mark m…
Anti-Dissection RuleComposite MarksDeceptive SimilarityTrade DressTrade MarksIndustria De Diseno Textil, S.A. v. Registrar of Trade Marks & Anr.
Section 11(2) does not require an earlier mark to have a formal declaration of well-known status before its owner can oppose a later mark; the provision only requires that the mark is well known. The term 'entitled' in Explanation…
Anti-Dissection RuleBad FaithDeceptive SimilarityPhonetic SimilarityTrade MarksRenaissance Hotel Holdings Inc. v. B. Vijaya Sai & Ors.
Section 29(4) of the Trade Marks Act applies only to marks used on dissimilar goods or services and cannot be invoked where the defendant's goods or services are identical to those of the registered proprietor, which instead falls…
Deceptive SimilarityDilutionSection 29(4)Trademark InfringementTrade MarksTata Sons Ltd. v. Greenpeace International & Anr.
Use of a registered trade mark in a non-commercial context, for the purpose of parody, satire or criticism of the proprietor's conduct, does not amount to infringement or dilution under Section 29(4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, …
Comparative AdvertisingDilutionFreedom Of SpeechParodyGeographical IndicationsTea Board, India v. ITC Limited
A certification trade mark or geographical indication registered for a good protects only that good and does not, without more, extend to use of the certified word for unrelated services; an infringement action under the Geographi…
Certification Trade MarkDilutionGeographical IndicationLimitation