Vogue Readers Know It Doesn’t Run Any Institute, Confusion Unlikely: Karnataka High Court, Allows Vogue Institute Of Management To Retain Name
Case: MR. M.M. KARIAPPA & ANR v. ADVANCE MAGAZINE PUBLISHERS, INC.
Coram: Justice M I Arun
Case No.: REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.106 OF 2015
Court Observation: “It is an action for violation of common law rights and is enforceable in respect of all trademarks registered or unregistered. False and misleading representation resulting in deception or confusion is the key to the answer. The only aspect to be considered is whether the mark is likely to deceive or confuse the public who may buy defendants’ goods as if they were the plaintiff’s goods.”
“The magazine which is published by the plaintiff is a fashion magazine which is not subscribed or read by a large section of the general public. It is used by that limited section of the Society who are generally aware about fashion. The kind of purchasers who subscribe to the magazine of the plaintiff are likely to know that the plaintiff’s magazine is involved only in the business of publishing magazines and not running any institute,”
“The trial court has failed to appreciate the aforementioned factor,”
Previous Posts
Family Court Can Restore Application U/S 125 CrPC After Its Dismissal For Default: Orissa High Court
Doctrine Of Group Of Companies, Can’t Implead Third Party To Arbitration: Delhi High Court
Keywords
Vogue Readers, Vogue Institute Of Management
