Infosys Technologies Ltd. is a brand name in the field of consulting and Information Technology. Infosys has presence in about 17 countries including USA, U.K., Germany, France, Canada, Australia, China, Switzerland and Japan. With a net income of $419 million, Infosys is the first Indian company to get its share listed in Nasdaq.
Right under the nose of Infosys, another company operating in the same filed was cashing in on the global reputation of Infosys that ultimately led to Infosys Technologies Ltd V. Access Infosys and Anr. 2005 (31) PTC 378(Del).
Infosys Technologies filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the Access Infosys from infringing its trademark ‘Infosys’. Infosys was widely using its trademark ‘infosys’ for designating its corporate entity, products and services across the world. ‘Infosys’ was registered in the name of the former in the year 1987.
When infosys came to know of the existence of the name ‘Access Infosys’ they served a cease and desist notice to the defendants in the year 2001. However in its reply Access infosys refused to comply with the notice. Access infosys was carrying on the same business and had its office in the same building as Infosys. Further, Access Infosys was also been using the domain name accessinfosys.com. The main contention of Infosys was that Access Infosys was owned by the entity named Sannet Computers Pvt. Ltd and had no connection with the word ‘Infosys’. The mark was adopted with a dishonest intention of deceiving the public and trading on the global reputation and goodwill of Infosys. The use of the mark by Access Infosys was causing unascertainable harm to the Infosys.
Access Infosys appeared before the Court once but later on, neither filed any written statement nor made any appearance before the Court. Therefore the Court proceeded ex-parte against Access infosys.
On the perusal of the evidence produced by Infosys, the Court granted perpetual injunction against Access Infosys from using the trademark ‘infosys’ as a part of its corporate name or on their website or advertisements or other commercial operations in any other manner. The Court also awarded cost of the suit to Infosys against the Access Infosys.
It is a clear case of dishonest adoption of a famous trademark inorder. It is respectfully submitted that Delhi High Court should have take a stricter stand and awarded exemplary damages to Infosys against this blatant usurpation of a trademark.
This article enunciates the recent, much awaited, and landmark judgment delivered on September 16, 2016 by Hon'ble Delhi High Court throwing light on the important provisions of the Copyright Act, 1962.
Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion recently issued an office memorandum pursuant to receiving representations from various stakeholders for guidance with respect to the applicability of the provisions of Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957.
An Invention Disclosure Form is the documentation of the invention. This is a means to document particulars of your invention and submitting it to the patent attorney who is filing your patent application.
The Patents Act 1970, along with the Patents Rules 1972, came into force on 20th April 1972, replacing the Indian Patents and Designs Act 1911. The Patents Act was largely based on the recommendations of the Ayyangar Committee Report headed by Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar. One of the recommendations was the allowance of only process patents with regard to inventions relating to drugs, medicines, food and chemicals.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).