2023 years 6 month 1 day, The Delhi High Court ruled that New Balance, a major global manufacturer of sports footwear and apparel (New Balance Athletics) Carry the case, The company had previously targeted the use of fraudulently similar company names, Logos and domain name entities New Balance Immigration Filed a lawsuit. The court granted an ex parte permanent injunction in favor of the plaintiff, And ordered the defendant to pay 5000 Expenses payable in US dollars.

New Balance is in 120 Country design, manufacture, Promote and sell footwear and clothing, "New Balance" The first use of the name dates back to 1906 The United States of America. Since then, The company has been using New Balance As the company name for its companies around the world. It is also "NEW BALANCE" and "NB" The registered owner of the trademark, Date of first use in India is 1986 years. New Balance is still here 1995 Registered a domain name "www. newbalance. com" .

On the other hand, The defendant was in the business of providing immigration and visa application services. The action is in 2022 Be raised, When the plaintiff learned that the defendant had used:

－ "NEW BALANCE" Trademarks as part of their company name;

－ "NB" Equipment trademark as part of its company logo; and

－Domain name "www. newbalanceimmigration. com" .

After the defendant failed to respond to the legal notice served, New Balance filed a lawsuit in the Delhi High Court. 2022 years 10 month, The court granted an ex parte injunction in favor of the plaintiff, To prohibit the defendants from using the New Balance trademark. however, The defendant did not comply with the court order, The document that led the plaintiff to file an application to supplement the public record, To demonstrate the defendant's continued use of the challenged trademark. The defendant also filed an application, Claim to participate in proceedings, And submitted a written statement, Arguing that the logo used was different from the plaintiff's trademark, And it is used in different trade channels, So there is no possibility of confusion.

The court held that, The plaintiff has proved it right "NEW BALANCE" Legal and common law rights to trademarks and associated goodwill and reputation, These rights go beyond goods of interest. The court further stated that, New Balance Immigration Failure to explain its deceptive similarity to the plaintiff's trademark "NEW BALANCE/NB" Use of signs. According to the court, The defendant's use was dishonest, It is intended to promote its business by establishing contacts with the plaintiff and using the plaintiff's goodwill and reputation. Use by the defendant "newbalanceimmigration" As its domain name may also deceive consumers. The court cited Anugya Gupta v Ajay Kumar (2022 SCC On Line Del 1922) The decision in the case, The ruling held that:

The rights of domain owners to domain names should be equally protected. Due to using the same or similar domain name, User traffic may be diverted, This can cause users to access a domain name by mistake, Not the domain name it is intended to visit. therefore, A domain name may have all the characteristics of a trademark, And may lead to counterfeiting.

The court also found that the plaintiff had successfully established the defendant's acts of infringement and impersonation, A permanent injunction was issued against the defendant. It also ordered the defendant to pay 40 Lakh rupees (4900 U. S. dollar) Cost of, Because it adopted the relevant trademark neither in good faith, It's not honest. (Be compiled from www. worldtrademarkreview. com)

TRANSLATORS: Wang Dan　proofread: Liu Peng



　　disclaimer: This network reprint or compile the original articles are from the network, Does not represent the views of this website or confirm the authenticity of its content. If the source is mislabeled or the copyright of the article is involved, Please contact us, This website will be corrected in due course, delete, thank you.