Topical Highlight
Phone Pe v. Bharat Pe: Whether Vernacular Wordplay Can Save from Being Labelled Generic?
BharatPe and PhonePe trademarks side-by-side (image from here)
In this guest post, Devangini responds to an earlier guest post on the Delhi High Court’s recent interim injunction order in Phone Pe v. Bharat Pe trademark dispute. She first summarises the history of the case, the arguments, and the court’s holding. She critiques the court’s reliance on the Delhi High Court case of Marico v. Agrotech to deny the plaintiff’s claim on two grounds. First, the term ‘Pe’ should not have been classified as descriptive/ generic. Second, while dissecting PhonePe, the court failed to acknowledge the fact that ‘Pe’ should be treated as dominant as can be discerned from its logo. She also notes the malafide intention of the defendant in attempting to adopt a strikingly similar logo to that of the plaintiff before abandoning it. Finally, in conclusion she points out the court’s conclusion of the difference in services offered by the parties while correct, the difference is not substantial and could be inconsequential especially for less tech savvy or illiterate merchants which are target groups for both parties.
Other Post
Webinar on ‘TRIPS Waiver: Update and Analysis of Recent Developments’ [June 5]
We informed our readers about a webinar on ‘TRIPS Waiver: Update and Analysis of Recent Developments’ organized by the People’s Health Movement (PHM) and the Third World Network (TWN) on June 5, 2021. The details of the event are available in the post here.
Decisions from Indian Courts
Other News from around the Country
News from around the World
Note: The applications for SpicyIP Fellowship are now open and will close on June 30, 2021.