When it comes to trademarks, a familiar yet crucial question arises whether ‘names’ can be registered under trademark protection in India. Section 9(d) of The Trademark and Merchandise Act, 1958 explicitly refused the trademark of personal names and surnames. However, the new law, i.e. the Trade Marks Act, 1999, lacks any provision to include or exclude personal names or surnames from getting trademark protection.
The general rule that prevails is that a name or a surname cannot be given protection under the trademark if it does not have a distinguishing character. This means that personal names or surnames can be registered as a trademark when it bears some distinctiveness. Even though it is challenging to protect surnames or personal names as trademarks, we are surrounded by many surnames that have successfully attained trademark protection. Few examples include Suzuki, Ford, Tata, Mahindra, Sony, Honda, Bajaj etc. The court has clarified the position regarding surnames from time to time in several cases. Regarding this, the courts have come to the following stance:
- If the proposed term for registration does not have any other meaning than a surname, it cannot be registered unless the applicant shows distinctiveness.
- If the word proposed for registration has a “well recognized” meaning other than a mere surname, then it can be registered even if no proof of distinctiveness is provided.
The U.S. courts also believe that some acquired distinctiveness must be demonstrated if the name is predominantly a surname. If the name is personal, you may use it as a trademark as long as a namesake does not come first, which means that your proposed personal name would not confuse you with a similar name currently used for connected goods or services. Henceforth we see that many celebrities such as Rihanna, Taylor Swift, Kylie Jenner, etc., have successfully acquired a trademark for their names.
Indian celebrities lag behind the celebrities of the west in trademark registration; they can’t truly blame the law for this. As the Trademarks Act of 1999 contains no specific provision allowing or prohibiting the registration of names, it is safe to presume that registration of a personal name is permitted. According to Section 2(zb) of the Trademarks Act, 1999, “Trademark” refers to a mark that may be represented graphically and that can differentiate one person’s goods or services from those of another, and can include the shape of the goods, their packaging, and colour combinations. A careful reading of the definition reveals that a trademark cannot be registered in itself to protect a person’s brand value.
In India, celebrities have begun to register their names as trademarks. Such is done to protect the name from being misappropriated. It also restricts commercial use, which includes films, television, and commercials. There are various examples of celebrities who have trademarked their names. Kajol has filed trademark applications in many categories, including telecommunications, websites, household goods, carpets, bags. Sanjeev Kapoor owns the trademark ‘SANJEEV KAPOOR KHAZANA,’ which is registered under Class 29 of the Trademark Act.
The Indian courts have from time to time delivered judgments posing affirmative response to the protection of names as surnames in the country. For instance, in D.M. Entertainment v. e and Ors, a well-known Indian singer and composer sued the defendant for registering the domain name dalermehndi.net. The defendant was barred from using the trademark DALER MEHNDI by the Delhi High Court and recognized the fame and reputation attached to the performer’s name.
In summary, it can be observed that personal names and surnames may attain trademark protection when it has acquired distinctiveness or has become well known. Celebrities in India are increasingly pursuing trademark protection for their names. In India, the trend appears toward defensive registration to protect the celebrity’s reputation rather than on actual goods or services, which contrasts with the practice elsewhere.
Disclaimer: The present article intends to provide general guidance on the subject, and you can also consult us in your specific case.
I oversee a vape store website directory and we have had a listing from a vape store in the USA that likewise markets CBD product lines. A Calendar month later, PayPal has contacted use to say that our account has been limited and have asked us to get rid of PayPal as a payment solution from our vape shop website directory. We do not offer CBD items such as CBD oil. We solely offer marketing solutions to CBD companies. I have taken a look at Holland & Barrett– the UK’s Well known Wellness Store and if you take a close look, you will witness that they offer for sale a somewhat extensive range of CBD products, specifically CBD oil and they also happen to take PayPal as a payment method. It seems that PayPal is administering twos sets of rules to many different companies. Due to this limitation, I can no longer accept PayPal on my CBD-related site. This has restrained my payment possibilities and right now, I am heavily reliant on Cryptocurrency payments and straightforward bank transfers. I have consulted a barrister from a Magic Circle law office in The city of london and they said that what PayPal is doing is completely illegal and inequitable as it should be applying a systematic criterion to all companies. I am still to consult with a different lawyer from a US law office in The city of london to see what PayPal’s legal position is in the United States. Meanwhile, I would be very appreciative if anybody here at targetdomain could provide me with substitute payment processors/merchants that work with CBD companies.