Registrable and non-registrable marks

Absolute grounds for refusal (s. 9)

S. 9(1)

a)No distinctive character – not capable of distinguishing goods or services

b)marks or indications which depict kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, values, geographical origin or time of production

c)marks which are customary in the current language or in the bona fide and established practices of the trade

Exception – Acquired a distinctive character because of use or is a well known mark 

S. 9 (2)

a)Deceiving the public or causing confusion

b)hurting religious susceptibilities of citizens

c)scandalous or obscene

d)prohibited under Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 

S. 9(3) 

a)Shape of goods which results from the nature of goods themselves 

b)Shape of goods necessary to obtain a technical result 

c)Shape which gives substantial value to goods 

Absolute grounds (s. 9)

•Distinctiveness 

–Invented words, non-descriptive words/devices 

–Words like ‘good’, ‘best’, ‘superfine’, ‘superior’ are descriptive and hence not distinctive – WN Sharpe Ltd v. Solomon Bros Ltd., (1915) RPC 15 

–‘Greetings’ word – not distinctive and hasn’t acquired secondary meaning in relation to the product: Britannia Industries Ltd. V. Cremica Agro Foods Ltd. (2008) 38 PTC 89 (Del.) 

•Factors to see whether secondary meaning acquired 

–Extent of its use on the product 

–Expenditure incurred by the plaintiff in marketing and promoting the product under the trade mark 

–Profits and sales revenue etc. 

•These factors reflect 

–popularity 

–usage 

–Consumer recognition 

–Market strength of the mark 

Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Gujarat Co-op. Milk Mark. Fed. Ltd. (2008) 

•Descriptiveness 

–Imparting information directly 

–Such word describes something material to the composition of the article: In Re Burroughs Welcome & Co’s Trade Marks, (1904) 21 RPC 217 

–Different from ‘suggestive’ words which may be registered. E.g. ‘Motorine’ for lubricating oil in motors: Motorine case (1937) 

–Rasoi for groundnut oil refers to character: Hindustan Devp Corp Ltd. v. Dy. Registrar AIR 1955 Cal 519 

–‘Janta’ for torch although doesn’t refer to character but is commonly used word: Geep Flashlight Industries Ltd. v. Registrar, AIR 1972 Del 179 

–‘Micro’, ‘mutualfund’, ‘kabadibazaar’ : not registrable 

•Geographical names 

–Liverpool, Eboli (Italy), Glastonbury, Yorkshire 

–Simla 

–Only such geographical names may be registered which do not serve to designate the geographical origin 

•Small and insignificant places 

•Used in arbitrary or fanciful manner 

•Tijuana Smalls for cigars, Magnolia for flowers, North Pole bananas, Monte Rosa cigarettes 

•marks which are customary in the current language or in the bona fide and established practices of the trade 

–‘Auto’ German word for car; ‘croissant’ French for pastries 

•Deceive and Cause confusion 

–Deceive: tell a lie or make false representation and make him believe that something is true which in fact is false 

–Confuse: causing confusion without lying or making false representation 

–‘Swiss Miss’ by US company on chocolates 

–Kodak for cycles; 

–Nuvol for oil v. Nujol for petroleum product; 

–Gluvita v Glucovita

•Religious susceptibilities 

–Picture of Lord Bhuddha, Gurunanak, Goddess Meenakshi (fertilizers) 

–Hallelujah 

•Scandalous or obscene 

•Emblems and Names 

–Name, emblem, seal of the UNO, WHO, GOI, States, etc 

–Indian Flag, Rashtrapati Bhavan, 

–M K Gandhi, Nehru, Shivaji Maharaj, PM etc.

•Shape of goods 

–Bar of soap with indentations along its side to allow a better grip 

–Nestle KitKat 

–Basic shapes of goods must free to use