Position Of Unconventional Trademarks In India

INTRODUCTION

As of late, the field of intellectual property has seen immense improvement, particularly with respect to trademarks. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (“TRIPS”) perceives different sorts of trademarks. India has additionally rolled out vital improvements in its laws to follow the arrangements of the TRIPS agreement.

A trademark according to S.2(1)(zb) of the Trademarks Act means “a mark capable of being represented graphically and which is capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of others and may include shape of goods, their packaging and combination of colors.” From a cursory reading of the same, it can be seen that the definition is quite open ended. Any mark, be it a word, device, brand, heading, letter, numeral etc if capable of distinguishing goods and services of one person from that of another, can be registered as a trademark. Although the entire aforementioned find place in the definition of a mark, there are certain marks such as smell and single colors that do not find a mention in the Act. They can still however be protected and given trademark status.An unconventional trademark is mainly in the form of sound marks, smell marks, shape marks or color marks.[1]

ANALYSIS

The Indian Trademark Regime has, so far, imitated the stand of European Union as far as the prerequisite of graphical representation for a trademark is concerned. Thus, it makes registration of non-conventional trademarks much more rigorous in India than in the United States. The non-conventional trademarks possess ability of source identifier despite not being easily graphically representable. The working of US Trademark Regime demonstrates this fact.[2]

According to the author, assuming that a particular non-conventional mark is distinctive and is not functional, a non-conventional mark like sound, smell or shape should be given trade mark protection. Non-conventional trademarks cater to a segment of society which has, in the opinion of the researcher, been ignored in the earlier trade mark regime. This is with reference to those for whom visual perception often becomes difficult or even impossible: the visually impaired[3] and the illiterate. Non-conventional marks encourage undertakings to develop new and innovative ways of branding. Companies reach out to newer markets, increasing benefits for themselves and a new segment of purchasers.

Some may argue that if smell receives protection now, a vista of intellectual property becomes exposed to potential registration;however, this is not a valid contention for arguing in favour of non-registration. It is opined that the provided the mark is not functional and is distinctive, there is no reason to prevent anything from receiving protection. Visual perceptibility should not be and is not a sine qua non for building brand association in the minds of the consumers. As observed above, non-conventional trademarks do fulfill the traditional purpose attached to trade mark protection. They also provide additional benefits. Thus, they should receive trade mark protection.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In the light of TRIPS Agreement and other related international legal instruments on trademark, there is a need for harmonization of trade mark systems worldwide.Hence, it is desirable to protect non-traditional trademarks in the interest of global trade.

There are two significant issues:

  • The harmonization of criteria for the registration of these marks, and whether an office/trademark registry that accepts for registration could apply to them by analogy the same criteria it applied to traditional marks.
  • The harmonization of modalities for registration, especially what would be considered an appropriate representation of the sign. It should be clarified whether the trademark registry should apply the same criteria of distinctiveness than for more traditional marks and what the criteria would be for graphical representation, particularly of non-visible signs.

At least the WIPO should come out with uniform guidelines concerning graphical representation of non-traditional trademarks. The WIPO Standing Committee on Information Technologies (SCIT) can provide proper guidelines with regard to the representation,description and the application of trademark principles to non-traditional trademarks. There are still grey areas in this regard:

  • The potential economic relevance of these marks for less developed markets.
  • The possibility of overlapping protection,for example with copyright, in the case of motion marks, with patent and design in case of shape trademarks.

For those signs where distinctive character can be proved, the requirement of graphical representation should not bar registration. In the modern global market, where traders market their products internationally, it is desirable to have a uniform policy among the TRIPS member states to provide for the registration of non-traditional trademarks.Where more and more jurisdictions come forward with relaxed and liberal interpretation of trademark, the inconsistencies existing in some countries surrounding the interpretation of graphical representation seem to hinder proprietors selling goods in international markets under non-traditional trademarks. This reminds the international community the urgent need to develop a uniform policy for the registration and protection of non-traditional trademarks.[4]

CONCLUSION

The new trademark rules have extensively laid down the procedure for application of unconventional marks. However, there is still a need for the law to catch up with modern marketing techniques that use colors, shapes, scents and sounds to make their product distinctive.Unconventional trademarks will definitely attract a new variety of customers who are more closely connected to the feel of the trademark rather than its visual appeal.

Author: Saloni Gupta, Intern at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorneys. In case of any queries please contact/write back to us at swapnils@khuranaandkhurana.com.

References:

[1]Shristi Bansal, ‘Non-Conventional Trademarks in India’ (MONDAQ, 9 March 2016)   accessed 15 September 2018

[2]Tanisha Agarwal, Vanshraj Mehta,Hear Me, Touch Me, Taste Me, Smell Me: Conventionalizing Non-Conventional Trade Marks in India’ (2017) Journal on Contemporary Issues of LawVol. 3 Issue 5

[3]David Vaver, ‘Unconventional and Well-Known Trademarks’ (2005) 1 Singapore Journal of Legal Studies 8

[4]Lisa Lukose, ‘Non-Traditional Trademarks: A Critique’ (2015) Journal of the Indian Law Institute, Vol. 57 Issue 2

Leave a Reply

Archives

  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • September 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010