In the landmark judgement on trademark rights which is applicable in the alcoholic beverage industry, the Delhi High Court has cancelled the 'Captain Blue' from the Trade Marks Registry. The matter was furthered by means of a petition filed by Diageo Scotland Limited, a well-known manufacturer of 'Captain Morgan' rum, seeking to restrain any third party from using the mark 'Captain Blue'. The case, Diageo Scotland Limited vs. Prachi Verma & Anr., focuses on understanding issues about brand identity, confusion among customers, as well as the laws that protect everyone involved against trademarks that have global recognition.
Background of the Dispute
- Diageo Scotland Limited is one among many operating in the global Diageo Group and has a wide portfolio of brands in spirits, one being the flagship Captain Morgan. This comprises the Diageo-marketed Captain Morgan Dark Rum, Captain Morgan White Rum, as well as Captain Morgan Gold Rum varieties. The brand is well recognized within the Indian markets and has had continuous and wide OFTS usage in that country since 2006.
- With roughly sales of USD 6.48 million, Diageo brought the brand of Captain Morgan to India in the year 2023. Such a long-established presence and strong penetration have enabled them to build equity and goodwill in that mark of name-captain.
Trademark Application and Opposition
- Prachi Verma (Respondent No. 1) is seeking registration of the mark 'Captain Blue' under Class 33, which refers to alcoholic beverages. The application was made on a "proposed to be used" basis because the goods had not been released into the market at the time of application.
- Diageo entered opposition promptly contesting the registration and contending that 'Captain Blue' would be deceptively similar to its 'Captain Morgan' brand. The company argued about the use of the word 'Captain' which is a trademark distinctive and at the level of source-indicating other goods would mislead consumers as well as dilute the identity of the brand to contend that the usage will so mislead consumers. Diageo also questioned the bona fides of the adoption since there was no evidential support that the respondent had a commercial intent or actual use.
- However, the Assistant Register of Trade Marks judged the complaint by Diageo by ruling that the trademark "Captain Blue" was different from "Captain Morgan" when considered in its entirety. Diageo expressed its discontent with this finding and has moved it to the court in Delhi.
The High Court’s Findings
- While reading Justice Saurabh Banerjee for the appeal, the proper import was given to previous use and reputation by Diageo with the caption. It, thus, acknowledged Diageo as the registered of the 'Captain' trademark, which has generated very good goodwill in both India and abroad.
- The mere changing of 'Captain' to 'Captain Blue,' said the judge, did not make it a distinctive mark considering that the products for sales in these types were alcoholic beverages same as Diageo's. It ruled that there was a manifest danger of confusion about which the customer could think of like interpreting 'Captain Blue' as an additional flavour of Captain Morgan offered by Diageo.
- Oxygen was given to critical lacunae in the order of the Assistant Registrar. The Registrar failed to keep in consideration that it was a 'proposed to be used'- application, and the respondent presented no evidence to prove bona fide intent in terms of the commercial preparations or actual use of the mark, said the Court. In terms of the registration process, these omissions, according to the court, were heavy and substantial.
Order and Implications
- In the findings, the High Court of Delhi overturned the Assistant Registrar's ruling and as well as it directed the removal of the "Captain Blue" trademark from the Trade Marks' registry. The judgment reinforces the principles that established trademarks with good market sell should be given good protection, especially from new marks that are indulged in the risk of dilution of their distinctiveness.
- The judgment is a warning for the fledging entrants into the beverage and consumer goods market. It emphasizes the need for due diligence, starting with the obliterate registration of trademark applications that are cognised to be deceptively similar to extending well-known brands.
Conclusion
This case is a clear affirmation of the commitment of the Indian judiciary to the protection of intellectual property rights in the context of preventing consumer deception. For companies like Diageo bearing heavy relevance on the development of global brands, the judgment provides reassurance that their trademarks shall not be diluted or appropriated by clever yet misleading branding.
As India continues to be a lucrative market for international and domestic alcohol brands alike, the Diageo vs. Prachi Verma judgment is most likely going to be cited as a landmark precedent in trademark cases concerning deceptively similar marks in the same category of goods.
Sharks of Law offers a comprehensive legal solutions facility, providing an extensive collection of information on diverse areas of law in the legal field by the best professionals in this area. With this law firm, you can search and find a lawyer who can meet your legal requirements for online consultation. The attorneys at Sharks of Law have the necessary expertise across all the fields involved should you have any inquiries that require legal counsel.
Email:-helpdesk@sharksoflaw.com
Help Desk:-+91-88770-01993
