?
> Trademark > Articles

What is Trademark Tarnishment and How to Deal with It?

Dilution is a type of violation of a trade mark, in which the defendant’s use, while not causing a likelihood of confusion, blurs distinctiveness or tarnishes the image of the plaintiff’s mark. The protection extended under Section 29(4) of the Trademark Act, 1999 even to dissimilar goods and services is actually based upon the “Doctrine of Dilution.”

The Court, while referring to section 29 (4) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, recognized the essentials for dilution as under:

(1) The impugned mark must be identical or similar to the injured mark;

(2) The one claiming injury due to dilution must prove that her/his mark has a reputation in India;

(3) The use of the impugned mark is without due cause;

(4) The use of the impugned mark (amounts to) taking unfair advantage of or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the registered trade mark.

An important aspect for protecting trademarks is to avoid weakening or dilution of the trade marks. If the subsequent user adopts the similar or near similar mark in respect of same goods it would not only decrease the value of the trade mark of a prior user but ultimately may result in dilution of the mark itself.

Such an invasion of the subsequent user is nothing short of commercial invasion. Trade mark is like a property and no unauthorised person is allowed to commit trespass. Such kind of dilution or weakening of the trade mark need not, therefore, be accomplished with an element of confusion.

In Caterpillar Inc.  v. Mehtab Ahmed and Others, the Delhi High Court held that so far as doctrine of dilution is concerned it is an independent and distinct doctrine. The underlying object is that there is presumption that the relevant customers start associating the mark or trade mark with a new and different source.

It results in smearing or partially affecting the descriptive link between the mark of the prior user and its goods. In other words the link between the mark and the goods is blurred. It amounts to not only reducing the force or value of the marks slice by slice. Such kind of dilution is not a fair practice that is expected in trade and commerce.

Dilution of trade mark may also be made by way of sullying or impairing distinctive quality of a trade mark of a senior user. This is common parlance is known as dilution by tarnsihment.

The object of such an invasion is to tarnish, degrade or dilute the distinctive quality of a trade mark. For example, if an attempt is made to communicate a message that a particular product of a senior user is injurious to health or is inferior in quality and some epithet is used in the advertisement. If one has to convey the message that Coca-Cola is bad for health, and his advertisement campaign say Drink Cocaine in the same font and stylised script as used by the senior user, he will be liable for dilution.

It is different from traditional infringement. Infringement laws are designed to protect consumers whereas dilution statutes protect owners. A dilution claim is not based on infringement or deception. It is based on value of trademark to its owner, which has been termed the mark’s ‘commercial magnetism’.

Tarnishment is subsumed under the term ‘dilution’. Trademark tarnishment not only blurs a mark’s distinctiveness but also mars a marks positive assational value.

The Act if dilution of trade mark by way of tarnishment is always with regard to well recognised, strong and famous trademarks. It has the effect of diminishing or weakening the strength and identification value of the trade mark. There is no need to establish likelihood of confusion as to source, affiliation and connection. This is so as some potential purchasers may be confused as to source or affiliation while others may not.

Doctrine of dilution, even though recognized by courts in reference to Section 29(4) as a remedy independent of infringement action, owes its development to and flourishes in the protective blanket of passing off. Thus, to make it a successful independent cause of action, what is required is clarity in the provision by resolving the issues mentioned above.




View all articles tagged with: trademark