Trademarks are critical in displaying the quality of a product or service. Furthermore, it distinguishes your brand by distinguishing its goods and services from those of other firms in a certain industry. The trademarks of your corporation or business are a valuable asset. In essence, this means that the value of your trademark is tightly tied to the growth of your firm. Invention refers to the occurrence of an idea for a product or process that has never been made before. Innovation implies the implementation of idea for product or process for the very first time.
A trademark must be registered in order to prevent unauthorized use by other businesses and individuals. As a result of trademark registration, a person or company owner will have exclusive ownership of a certain logo or brand name.
In his piece, Schechter claimed that trademark protection should extend beyond worries about public dishonesty to include preventing someone from “vitiating the originality and distinctiveness of the mark.” Frank Schechter is known as the “Father of Dilution” in popular culture due to his publications that laid the groundwork for the concept of dilution.
The Trade Marks Act of 1999 introduced trademark dilution.
Brand dilution is a legal concept that permits the owner of a well-known or famous trademark to restrict others from using the mark in a way that diminishes its distinctiveness. To deceive customers, unauthorised users duplicate well-known trademarks and manufacture similar marks. Trademark dilution is a concept that allows a well-known trademark owner to prevent this from happening.
A well-known trademark owner may prohibit others from using their mark on the grounds that doing so would erode its uniqueness or harm its reputation, which is a type of surface trademark infringement. In practise, it is illegal for anybody to mimic well-known trademarks or to exploit their reputation. Dilution protection, on the other hand, attempts to keep sufficiently well-known and powerful trademarks from losing their distinctive identification with a certain product in the public consciousness.
Blurring and tarnishment are the two most common kinds of dilution. Dilution by blurring happens when the uniqueness of a well-known trademark is harmed by a trademark created by an unauthorized party. For example, if a company uses the Nokia name on toothpaste, customers may grow to identify the well-known brand with the toothpaste brand. Sunpharma’s brand image may suffer as a result of this.
The classic e.g., On its cookware goods, Maruti Metals used the brand ‘Amul.’ The defendant company’s trademark was confusingly similar to the Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd’s trademark “Amul.” The use of a similar trademark might cause market confusion. However, the defendant company’s unlawful mark was not registered but was incorrectly displaying as a registered mark.
The facts of the case call for ad interim remedies, which also amounts to public fraud. According to the Court, the name ‘Amul’ is unique, has no grammatical meaning, and is known by the public as the plaintiff company’s products. Any other entity using the word ‘Amul’ as a trademark may be committing infringement. The plaintiff’s lawyer alleged that the defendant (Maruti Metals) had improperly depicted its brand (Amul Cookware) as a registered trademark in the market.
The Delhi High Court has barred Maruti Metals from using the term ‘Amul Cookware’ on its cookware goods because it is confusingly similar to the Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd’s trademark. Furthermore, a mark utilised by Maruti Metals is not registered and is being shown unlawfully as a registered mark.
In this case, the Court granted the Plaintiff Company (Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd), widely known as ‘Amul[1],’ an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in a trademark infringement lawsuit. The defendant firm (Maruti metals) was accused of marketing its kitchenware and utensils under an unapproved and deceptive mark, namely ‘Amul Cookware.’ As a result, the Court appeared to rule in favour of the Amul.
Dilution via tarnishment, on the other hand, occurs when a person or corporation utilises a mark in an offensive, unsuitable, or ludicrous manner. In general, unauthorised parties develop infringing marks to infer views or statements that contradict the original mark’s owner’s essential principles.
Conclusion:
The idea of dilution refers to the authority afforded to the knowledgeable trademark owner. This attitude will help to avoid fraudulent behaviours that occur over time, as well as to protect a company’s image. These well-known businesses contribute to the expansion of our country’s GDP, and it is the administration’s job to protect them against unfair competition and other deceptive activities. Section 29(4) is an additional measure to the violation action. Dilution is dependent on the courts’ power and the conditions they impose. To avoid confusion, a trademark that does not meet the court’s rules is not allowed in the marketplace.
https://www.legalserviceindia.com/
https://www.khuranaandkhurana.com/
livelaw.in
