Copyrights in Film Industries. The film taken as a whole is required to be considered while considering the infringement of a copyrights. There cannot be copyrights in idea. Sections 26 & 55–Infringement–Burden of proof–Before the charge of violation of copyright is levelled against the defendant, it must be shown that he has taken a substantial […]
Court: High Court of Bombay Case No: Notice of Motion (L) No. 1890 of 2018 in COMIP (L) NO. 1063 of 2018 Order dated: 28thAugust, 2018 Facts of the case: The plaintiff, is a Mumbai-based Generic Drug Manufacturer company. The Plaintiff is known for its products under the trademark CANDID- B which is an […]
Citation: 2007 (35) PTC 571 (GUJ) Decided on: 05.02.2007 Ratio Decidendi: “Passing off is a recurring wrong and such wrong can be prevented at any time.” “Delay itself may not be a sole ground for refusing injunction, if it is found that the Applicants have achieved distinctive goodwill in the trademark and they are […]
International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) v. Iskcon Appaeral (P) Ltd. (Decided on 26-06-2020)
In a trademark infringement suit filed by ISCKON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness) against Isckon Apparel Pvt Ltd for using the mark “ISKCON” in respect of various goods and services, ISCKON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness) has been granted the status of Well-known trademark under Section 2 (1) (zg) of Trademarks Act, 1999. The […]
Cadila Health Care Ltd vs Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd
Cadila Health Care Ltd. v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 2001 PTC 541 (SC) Brief Facts of the case: the plaintiff and the defendant are carrying on their activities in pharmaceutical products respectively in the name and style of “CADILA HEALTH CARE LIMITED” and “CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED” with the word “CADILA” being common first name respectively. It […]
Brief Facts: Respondents through their predecessors in interest were using the mark ‘Profol’ in India since 1998 for pharmaceutical product. In 2005, Respondents came to know that the Defendant have launched a drug called ‘ROFOL’ for identical product. Respondents filed a suit for passing off against the Appellant. The Trial Court granted a temporary injunction […]
