Savvy innovation is the name of the game in the electric mobility world. As companies rush to corner this maturing market, however, the noise and din over disputes often tend to drown out the positives. One classic case is how innovation and identity clash is well illustrated by the recent trademark conflict between Kinetic Green and Yulu Bikes, which details its impact on brand reputation and market dynamics.
The Players In The Electric Mobility Arena
Kinetic Green Energy & Power Solutions Ltd. and Yulu Bikes are two important players in India's electric vehicle sector. While Kinetic Green, a subsidiary of Kinetic Group has made its presence known with a line of electric scooters and three-wheelers designed for the city commute, Yulu Bikes, on the other hand, have focused their efforts towards offering eco-friendly electric bicycles, suited for short distances and congested cities. Both the brands are sustainability champions and zip through cities on electric bikes and scooters, but instead of racing to the finishing line, they ended up in a courtroom showdown.
Crux Of The Dispute
The fun and games ended a little too abruptly when Yulu decided to pull the brakes on Kinetic Green that was said to be playing a little too close to its branding. The legal spat began in the last week of January when Yulu had filed a case against Kinetic Green in a city civil and sessions court, alleging that the latter was infringing on the former's trademark by launching its "Zulu" e-scooters. Yulu had sought an ex-parte ad-interim injunction, or in other words, a temporary restraining order issued quickly by the court without requiring input from the opposing party involved. On the one hand, it serves as a method of staying the actions pending a full hearing. However, though the lower court declined their first request for an injunction, it did allow Kinetic Green to put its point before the court. Aggrieved with this decision, Yulu Bikes appealed the order to the Karnataka High Court.
The company's defence stated that the legal affairs of Kinetic Green Energy are taken care of by founder and CEO, Sulajja Firodia Motwani. She was also responsible for deciding the brand names of "ZULU" or "Kinetic Green-ZULU" as well as its marketing strategy for the electric scooters. They explained that the name "ZULU" was adopted because it rhymes with the nickname of Sulajja, "Sulu," which is one of the reasons for the tagline "Sulu Ki ZULU."
They also mention that Kinetic Green had always used four-letter names for all its products previously and underlined that the trademark was registered before launching the product. This order was after the Karnataka High Court had imposed an identical temporary injunction on February 5, directing the commercial court to hear the matter expeditiously. A commercial court at Bengaluru confirmed a provisional injunction against Kinetic Green Energy, restraining them from using, selling or advertising under the trademark "YULU" or any similar variations like "ZULU" and "Kinetic Green Zulu.".
Brand Identity & Market Confusion
The trademark dispute between Kinetic Green and Yulu Bikes presents some crucial issues pertaining to brand identity and market positioning. Kinetic Green filed a case against Yulu Bikes stating that the name and branding of Yulu would cause confusion with their existing trademarks.
This aspect of the dispute is important because though both these companies deal with environmental transportation solutions, their target market as well as products vary.
Kinetic Green urges that Yulu's branding dilutes their brand value and further confuses consumers to the detriment of their business.
However, Yulu, which primarily focuses on bike-sharing services, has defended its branding claiming its name reflects its business model and vision. Critical to both companies, along with the entire electric vehicle industry, will be the outcome for it may set some precedents in relation to brand differentiation and intellectual property rights. At the root of this case lies the fact that protecting identity through a brand is crucial in a competitive market, particularly since transportation around the world continues to gain popularity as a more environmentally friendly way of going about things. The case may set important precedents for brand protection in the eco-friendly vehicle market.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
