Bar & Bench News Network
Tata has lost its trademark infringement suit against Greenpeace, for using the Tata trademark in the infamous game (imitation of the legendary Pac-Man) Turtle Vs. Tata.
Greenpeace used Tata’s ‘T’ logo in the game and in defense, Tata filed a case for defamation trademark infringement against the Greenpeace organization. Justice Ravindra Bhat of the Delhi High Court dismissed the application filed by the Tata’s to temporarily restrain Greenpeace from making the video public, till the High Court decides on the defamation suit, reports the Hindustan Times.
Justice Ravindra Bhat stated prima-facie no trademark infringement has been made out against Greenpeace as they are not promoting their product using the Tata logo, but it (Tata logo) is being used for a completely non-commercial purpose - such as creating awareness. The Court also stated that freedom of expression cannot be stifled through an interim injunction.
Greenpeace was represented by Founder Partner Saikrishna Rajagopal of Saikrishna & Associates and Tata was represented by Anand and Anand.
The Greenpeace website states the congratulations message given by Founder Partner Saikrishna Rajagopal and states that the ruling is a huge blow in favour of the fundamental right to free speech, and perhaps the first time that India’s largest corporation has had its bullying ways thwarted.
Tata’s Dhamra port is near completion, but an RTI filed by the Greenpeace reveals in Minister Jairam Ramesh’s own handwriting stating that the port’s construction could have been stopped legally, had it not started. Greenpeace has been campaigning against the port for the last 5 years and this RTI indicates that powerful group corporations like the Tata’s are allowed to get away with blatant legal violations.
The protest is against Tata Steel- promoted Dharma Port project, where a deep-sea port is being set up at Bhadrak, Orissa. The location of the port project is 15 kilometres from the nesting site of the endangered Olive Ridley sea turtle, which is the smallest extant sea turtle in the world.
Picture Source: Greenpeace
|
 |
- 1. "with due respect to Greenpeace, the need of the hour is to find a balance between industrialization and environment protection. Both are important phenomenons that cannot be ignored. The government has to take adequate steps to allow industries to grow, but not at the expense of damaging the environment. Unfortunately, until the government takes the right initiative, there will be conflict, which does not serve anyone's purpose. ". ANon, Mumfai
- 2. "If greenpeace medha patker etc were there from zero dt this world would not be like this. May be we would all be living in jungle along with other animals". Dmrao, (Unknown City)
- 3. "We think this Greenpeace should change the name Tata because taking reference of this judgment other companies may take unfair advantages though it for non-profit and/or awareness concerns.". K. A. BARI , Bangladesh
- 4. "It's a good thing Greenpeace won. Honestly, Tata is trying to bully everyone that stands in their way. First they try, and are still trying, to take the Radia tapes off air and now this. Oh, and about industrialization and environmental balance, if we mess with one aspect, we do the other on in. Global warming anyone?!". Akash, Chennai
Related Stories
- Game over for Greenpeace? Tata files defamation and trademark infringement suit: Anand and Anand & Saikrishna Rajgopal in Delhi High Court
- AZB & Partners advise JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs in Tata Power GDR issue
- AZB, AMSS advise on Tata Tinplate rights issue
- AZB completes Tata Motors $750 million GDR
- AZB, Amarchand steer sale of Daimler's shares in Tata Motors
- Tata Steel raises $2.08 billion via debt; Luthra advises
- Salans, Shearman, Pinsent Masons, Linklaters, Clifford Chance, DLA Piper and Freshfields advise on SSI to buy assets worth $469 million in Tata Steel and enter into a JV
Other News
- Linklaters Managing Associate Pranav Sharma to rejoin Amarchand Mangaldas as Partner
- Re-Upped Round up May 17
- Recruitment Tracker: Luthra top recruiter followed by Amarchand and AZB for NALSAR Class of 2012
- Siddharth Wahi joins JSA as Of Counsel; Former Baker Mckenzie SA to focus on Energy Sector
- Re-Upped Round up May 16
- Bombay HC taking proactive steps to fight pendency; Special committee to examine pending civil suits for speedy disposal
- CLAT Booze Bills: NUJS defies providing information under RTI Act
The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?
May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the comments (2)
Webmasters: AIKYA