Absolute ground for refusal of Trademark registration are: Mark is devoid of or not capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of another person Mark consists exclusively or indications which may serve in trade to designate the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, values, geographical origin or the time of production of the goods or rendering of the service or other characteristics of the goods or service Mark consists exclusively of indications which have become customary in the current language or in the bona fide and established practices of the trade Relative Grounds for Refusal of Registration are: It is identical or similar with an earlier trademark with similar list of goods or services and there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public, which includes the likelihood of association with the earlier trademark If it is identical or similar with an earlier well-known trade mark in India and the use of the later mark without due cause would take unfair advantage of or be detrimental to the distinctive character or repute of the earlier trademark.

The easiest way to understand the criteria for similar or identical trade marks is to look at trademarks as a common prudent person.

Not every person feels confident about applying to register a trademark by themselves.

Meaning, you can exclude some goods or services from your original application; however, you can not include any new ones.

But applicant is not the only one who can provide further evidence.

More on: Trademark Search When is Trademark published in Trademarks Journal?

A shape trade mark is a three-dimensional shape used to distinguish the goods or services of one trader from those of other traders.

You can register a colour as a trademark: Single Colour Trademark; one colour register as a trademark if it is peculiar in business.

A business entity can be defined as any ordinary person carrying out activities related to industry, commerce or any other business or profession.

With many such cases not pointing any one case, in particular, shows the intention of the patent troll companies i.e. to mint quick money from software companies and covering other avenues slowly using cease and desist.