The Respondents 1 and 2, represented by BananaIP Counsels, primarily relied on the principle of Territoriality, claiming that local use was mandatory to claim spill-over of reputation. Further claims were made that the consumers primarily associate the mark HYPNOS with the Applicant and that the Respondents’ mark being associated with similar products was causing misrepresentation in the course of trade and causing dilution in the form of erosion and tarnishing of the reputation of the Applicant. The Applicant claimed that their mark was eligible for protection under the Indian Trademark Law owing to the spill over of its trans-border reputation making it a well-known mark and that the existence of the impugned mark created a likelihood of confusion between the two marks. goodwill, misrepresentation and the resultant damage. The Counsel for the Applicant also relied on the principle of Classical Trinity in a passing off action which laid down the three requirements for a valid passing off action, i.e. He further argued the Right of Priority of worldwide use in case the reputation spilling over to India has precedence over the priority of use in India. He further argued that this trans-border reputation enjoyed by the Applicant’s mark had spilled over to India, thereby rendering the requirement of localized use in India inconsequential for the purposes of the Applicant’s mark attaining rights under Common law. The Learned Counsel for the Applicant argued that the mark of the Applicant had trans-border reputation owing to its usage in various countries. The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), Chennai after analyzing the evidence and the arguments submitted by both the Parties decided in favour of the Respondents with no orders as to costs. The Respondents, in turn, filed a civil suit before the Karnataka District Court which remains pending. Hypnos ltd registration#
The Applicant further claimed that the Respondent had dishonestly adopted and applied for registration of the impugned trademark ‘HYPNOS’, which was internationally exclusively associated with the Applicant. The rectification petition was filed by the Applicant on the grounds that their mark was known worldwide and this trans-border reputation had spilled over to the territory of India. The Applicant had also filed a trademark application for HYPNOS (Label) which is pending before the Trademark Registry. The HYPNOS mark owned by Respondent No.1 is associated with mattress, pillows, cushions, seats and other related products. The Applicant, a UK based family run bed manufacturing company, filed a rectification petition to cancel the registration of the ‘HYPNOS’ trademark owned by Respondent No.
The Registrar of Trademarks, Trademarks Registry, Chennai
0 kommentar(er)
