The Bombay High Court (“Bombay HC”), in the case of Meso Pvt. Ltd. v. Liberty Shoes Ltd. ruled on a case of trademark infringement with respect to perfume products. The question before Bombay HC was whether a trademark used along with a house mark/brand mark amounts to infringement or not.
Meso Private Limited (“Meso”) manufactures and sells various cosmetic products, including two perfumes with trademarks “Legend” and “Flirt” (“Trademarks”), the bottles of perfumes are packed in boxes bearing the house mark: “Devon”. Liberty Shoes Ltd. (“Liberty”) launched two perfumes with names “Legend” and “Flirt” in 2018, these names were used along with the house name “Liberty”. This led to Meso filing a Trademark suit in the Bombay HC and moving for an injunction to restrain Liberty from selling these perfumes.
Meso submitted that names used for Liberty’s perfumes were identical or deceptively similar to the Trademarks. Whereas, Liberty argued that the Trademarks were generic words which were used by various other brands, also, Liberty’s products were being sold under the well-known brand of Liberty associated with the Liberty Group for several years, which had acquired a substantial reputation.
Bombay HC observed that the words “Legend” and “Flirt” are commonplace among perfume brands, there were various brands of perfumes which were using these names along with their brand/house mark. Bombay HC held that Liberty did not infringe the Trademarks as it used the names along with its own house mark, which has a strong reputation in India, hence, negating any scope of confusion being caused by Liberty’s products.
Further, the Bombay HC observed that both parties were selling their products through different platforms, Liberty sold its products outlets and e-commerce platforms and Meso was engaged in export of its products. Thus, Bombay HC did not grant injunction against Liberty.
Quick View
Bombay HC correctly observed the difference in the selling platforms of the two parties while deciding that Liberty had not infringed the Trademarks. This judgment has set a precedent that trademarks used along with a prominent house name/brand name will not amount to trademark infringement if such use is not creating confusion in the minds of the prospective consumers.
Learn more about our Intellectual Property practice.
#GenericTerms #Trademark #BombayHighCourt #IntellectualProperty #GameChangerLawAdvisors
Disclaimer: This post has been prepared for informational purposes only. The information/or observations contained in this post does not constitute legal advice and should not be acted upon in any specific situation without seeking proper legal advice from a practicing attorney.