Japan Patent Office’s logo is an original artistic work and is entitled to copyright protection from illegal adoption: Delhi High Court grants ex parte injunction
Title: Japan Patent Office v. Ms. A2Z Glass and Glazing Co. & Ors.
Citation: CS(COMM) 720/2023, I.A. 20046/2023, 20047/2023, 20048/2023, 20049/2023, 20050/2023, 20051/2023, 20052/2023 & 20053/2023
Decided on: 11th October, 2023
Coram: Justice Pratibha M. Singh
Introduction
The present suit presents an ironic situation wherein the Japan Patent Office’s (JPO) logo has been identically adopted by an Indian company and its sister concerns. The Delhi High court compared the situation to a ‘theft being committed in a police station’. The body entrusted for the protection of intellectual property of others, finds itself in a legal battle with the defendants for the illegal adoption of its logo by the defendants. Justice Pratibha M. Singh, further stated that the logo of JPO ought to be given copyright protection considering it is an original artistic work, which JPO is using since 2011 and have build subsequent goodwill not only in Japan but also in India. Considering all these factors, the Delhi High Court granted ex parte injunction to the defendants from further using JPO’s logo.
Facts of the case
Japan Patent Office (JPO), the plaintiff in this case, filed a suit against M/s. A2Z Glass & Glazing Co. (Defendant No.1), M/s. Future Architectural Glass Fitting (Defendant No.2) and M/s. Future Overseas (Defendant No.3), claiming illegal appropriation of its logo by the defendants for manufacture and sale of tools and kits. JPO is located in Tokyo, Japan and is a Japanese governmental agency which is in charge of the Industrial Property Rights affairs in Japan. Various initiatives have also been taken in India by JPO in the field of intellectual Property Rights, which shows the recognition and goodwill it has in India for last several years. JPO has been using its logo since 2011, way before the defendants who claimed their usage since 2020.
JPO’s main contention is that the defendant companies have blatantly imitated it’s ‘JPO’ mark/logo, for manufacturing and selling of their products in India. JPO also contends the application for trademark registration by the defendant companies of their mark ‘JPO PLATINUM’.
Court’s observation and analysis
The High Court stated that this suit presents a rather ironic situation, like a ‘theft being committed in a police station’. The body entrusted for the protection of intellectual property of others, finds itself in a legal battle with the defendants for the illegal adoption of its logo by the defendants. The court was of the opinion that the logo adopted by the defendant companies was completely similar and identical to JPO’s logo. The logo is an original artistic work and is entitled to copyright protection, as since the date of its creation, Japan is a WTO country. Under Section 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957, JPO would have the exclusive rights to use this logo.
The court further went on to say that the non-registration of JPO’s trademark or copyright was completely explicable as there was no apprehension that their logo can be imitated. Moreover, the defendant company’s use of the said logo is violative of JPO’s longstanding goodwill and brand equity. Such usage of the logo by the defendant company’s will not only cause dilution to JPO’s logo and mark but would also infringe upon its copyright protection.
Reference was made to the Supreme Court case of Laxmikant V. Patel v. Chetanbhai Shah & Ors., MANU/SC/0763/2001, wherein it was held that in situations where prima facie case of passing off can be made out, the Court ought to grant an immediate ex parte injunction and also appoint Local Commissioners to ensure that the infringing products are not permitted to be sold.
Taking into consideration the above cited judgement, in the present situation, the Plaintiff makes out a prima facie case for grant of an ex parte injunction. The balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiff considering its longstanding reputation and goodwill which will be severely affected if injunction is not granted. Accordingly, the Delhi High granted injunction to the defendant companies, restraining them from further using the logo ‘JPO PLATINUM’, or any other mark identical or similar to the JPO mark and logo, in respect of any products or services with immediate effect.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Amrita Rout