Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 APRIL 2007

Legislature Equipped To Ward Off Groundless Treats

Lex Orbis
Explore more from Lex Orbis

In the competitive world of business, it is natural for the rival traders to adopt and apply different tactics to boost up their own business. The real aim of the trademark is to reflect the bondage between the proprietor and the product.

IndiaIntellectual Property
Manisha Singh
Manisha Singh
Author LinkedIn connections

In the competitive world of business, it is natural for the rival traders to adopt and apply different tactics to boost up their own business. The real aim of the trademark is to reflect the bondage between the proprietor and the product. Similarities in mark are one of the challenges that are constantly posing a problem and the Judiciary has over a time framed up guidelines to test the extent of similarity.

But it is interesting to watch the legislative vision in section 120 of the Trade and Merchandise Act, 1958 and section 60 of the Copyright Act. Both the sections provide scope for initiating legal actions against groundless threats. One such petition was entertained by the Delhi High Court in Manoj Kumar Maheshwari v. Tips and Toes cosmetics Pvt. Ltd 2007 (34) PTC 121 (Del.)

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Copy, Right? ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open AI OpCo LLC

When an artificial intelligence system is trained on copyrighted news content, and later answers a user’s question using what it learned, has the law been broken? On 24th July 2026, the Delhi High Court answered that question, at least for now. In ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open AI OpCo LLC, Justice Amit Bansal declined to grant an interim injunction against OpenAI, holding, on a prima facie, interim stage view, that the company’s use of ANI’s news content to train its large language models (“LLMs”) falls within the fair dealing exception under Section 52(1)(a) of the Copyright Act, 1957
IndiaIntellectual Property
S.S. Rana & Co.
S.S. Rana & Co.
Article

AI Training Data, Copyright Risk And Commercial Liability: What Businesses Need To Know

On 8 October 2026, USA Today Co. and its affiliated newspaper companies, which publish 19 titles including USA Today, the Detroit Free Press and The Arizona Republic, sued seven OpenAI entities in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges that OpenAI copied their journalism to train its models, stripped identifying information from it, and now uses those models to give ChatGPT users summaries that substitute for the original reporting. The publishers seek more than USD 250 million in damages, an injunction and an order for the destruction of models and training sets containing their content.
IndiaIntellectual Property
Legitpro Law
Legitpro Law