Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 15 JUNE 2011

Trademark Used As Critical Comment Does Not Necessarily Lead To Infringement

Tata Sons (Plaintiff) in the case of "Tata Sons v. Greenpeace International" claimed a decree for permanent injunction and damages against Greenpeace International (Defendant No.1) for it’s alleged use of the Plaintiff’s "TATA" trademark.

IndiaIntellectual Property
Sonam Lhamu Bhutia
Sonam Lhamu Bhutia
Author LinkedIn connections

Tata Sons (Plaintiff) in the case of Tata Sons v. Greenpeace International claimed a decree for permanent injunction and damages against Greenpeace International (Defendant No.1) for it's alleged use of the Plaintiff's "TATA" trademark.

Tata Sons is India's oldest and largest private sector employer consisting of over 100 major operating companies, 28 of which are public limited companies. The revenue generated by it, within India is equivalent to 2.1% of India's GDP at current market price. It was stated by the Plaintiff that it had been continuously and consistently using the trademark "TATA" which is a rare and distinctive patronymic name possessing the distinctiveness of an invented word.

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.

See more popular content from