Supreme’ Red-Box Logo Given A ‘Well-Known’ Mark Status by the Delhi High Court

Introduction

Brand logos are one of the key identification factors of brands globally. Most brands register their trademark under the relevant law to prevent and punish any unauthorized usage. But some brands and their logos become so famous that even in the absence of registration, their logos get legal protection. The present case Chapter 4 Corp. v. Dhanpreet Singh Trading as M/S Punjabi Adda (2023) is one such instance. Let’s dive into this case, the arguments advanced by the parties, and the eventual judgment.

Background

Chapter 4 Corp. (the plaintiff), operating under the brand ‘Supreme’, introduced its mark ‘Supreme’ in the USA in 1994 and later internationally expanded its presence in India in 2006. The plaintiff owns over 700 registrations around the world for the mark ‘Supreme’ inside a red box. Additionally, the plaintiff has an active website, supremenewyork.com, to promote its products. On the other hand, Dhanpreet Singh (the defendant) was in the business of trading clothes under the name ‘M/s Punjabi Adda’.

The defendant was apparently selling T-shirts with the impugned logo on his websites, punjabiadda.com and punjabiadda.us. Upon discovering this, the plaintiff filed the present suit to seek a permanent injunction against the defendant.

Plaintiff’s Argument

The plaintiff heavily relied on the case of  Levi Strauss and Co. v. Imperial Online Services Pvt. Ltd. (2022), wherein ‘evidence of sales success, advertising expenditures, and length and exclusivity of use’ were observed as the factors determining the strength of a mark. Further reliance was placed on two more cases, namely Hermes International v. Crimzon Fashion Accessories Pvt. Ltd. (2023) and Disruptive Health Solutions v. Registrar of Trade Marks (2022). Both these cases provided more relevant factors to determine a mark as ‘well-known’, such as the extent of usage, knowledge or recognition of the mark, geographical area of the mark’s usage, acquisition of secondary meaning, etc.

Throughout the suit, the plaintiff tried to establish the ‘Supreme’ red-box logo’s popularity and goodwill in India and abroad. The plaintiff asserted that it has received extensive media coverage from leading media houses and that the mark reminds the public exclusively of the plaintiff and no other company.

To assert its popularity in the clothing industry, the plaintiff pointed out that it has collaborated with several high-end international clothes brands like Louis Vuitton, Burberry, Nike, etc. to launch its limited edition collaborative merchandise. According to the plaintiff, their brand’s valuation was around 1 billion USD in 2017, which, itself is proof of the well-known character of the impugned mark.

Further, it is worth noting that the plaintiff filed applications for registration of the ‘Supreme’ red-box logo in India in 5 classes (Classes- 9, 18, 25, 28 and 35). It was also contended that the plaintiff brand has over 700 trademark registrations of the mark in several key jurisdictions like the USA, EU, France, etc.

The plaintiff also relied on a study conducted by Harvard Business School, named ‘Supreme: Remaining Cool While Pursuing Growth’’ (2021), which referred to the plaintiff brand’s marketing strategy as a ‘guerilla approach’ because its products speak for themselves.

Defendant’s Argument

The defendant did not file its written statement in this case. Instead, during the proceedings, they entered into a Settlement Agreement with the plaintiff, acknowledging the plaintiff’s trademark rights in the impugned ‘Supreme’ red-box mark. As per the Settlement Agreement, the defendant agreed to abstain from filing any copyright or trademark application to register the impugned mark or any other mark similar to that of the impugned mark. The said Agreement also recorded the payment of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) as the plaintiff’s acknowledgement.

[Image Sources : Shutter stock]

tm law

Judgment

Pursuant to the plaintiff brand’s contentions and the Settlement Agreement signed by the parties, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court declared the ‘Supreme’ red-box logo or mark’s acquisition of a ‘well-known’ mark status with respect to clothing and apparel.

However, the court observed that since the word ‘Supreme’ is a dictionary word, the well-known mark status is provided only to the ‘Supreme’ red-box logo, and not to the word ‘Supreme’ in itself.

Conclusion

So, in this case, the plaintiff brand ‘Supreme’ managed to successfully protect its iconic red-box device mark. The court’s judgment recognized the mark as ‘well-known’ because of the brand and its logo’s long-standing presence in the market and extensive reputation.

One aspect that is still unclear with regard to the Settlement Agreement signed by and between the parties is whether or not it specifically prohibits the defendant from continuing to sell fake products with the impugned ‘Supreme’ red-box logo. Nevertheless, even if the said Agreement does not expressly prohibit it, the defendant’s continuous sale of counterfeit products with the impugned ‘Supreme’ red-box logo would be considered a violation of the court’s judgement. Since the settlement agreement specifically acknowledges the plaintiff’s trademark rights and restricts the defendant from filing trademark or copyright applications for similar marks, it can be inferred that the defendant is also prohibited from using the ‘SUPREME’ red-box logo in any manner without the plaintiff’s authorization. This includes selling counterfeit products that bear the protected mark. So, if the defendant persists in infringing on the plaintiff’s trademark rights, the plaintiff can take legal action to enforce the settlement agreement and the court’s judgment.

Author: G.B. Vishwa, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.

References

  1. judgementphp-12-482096.pdf (livelaw.in)
  2. https://insideretail.asia/2022/11/07/supreme-plots-asia-expansion-entering-china-and-south-korea/
  3. https://www.calameo.com/books/00717523382c350ba2742
  4. The History of Supreme: From Small Shop to Legendary Cult Status | Vogue

Leave a Reply

Categories

Archives

  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • 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