<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1954 (4) TMI 62 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275893</link>
    <description>A mark is refused registration where its ordinary public meaning, as applied to the goods, directly refers to their character or quality; here, &quot;Rasoi&quot; was treated as meaning cooking and therefore as a direct reference to cooking oil. Even if a mark does not fall within that direct-reference bar, distinctiveness remains a separate requirement for registrability, because the mark must still distinguish the applicant&#039;s goods from others. Common words of the language also cannot ordinarily be monopolised by one trader; only exceptional secondary significance acquired through long use can justify exclusive registration, and that was not shown here.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Apr 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:45:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539094" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1954 (4) TMI 62 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275893</link>
      <description>A mark is refused registration where its ordinary public meaning, as applied to the goods, directly refers to their character or quality; here, &quot;Rasoi&quot; was treated as meaning cooking and therefore as a direct reference to cooking oil. Even if a mark does not fall within that direct-reference bar, distinctiveness remains a separate requirement for registrability, because the mark must still distinguish the applicant&#039;s goods from others. Common words of the language also cannot ordinarily be monopolised by one trader; only exceptional secondary significance acquired through long use can justify exclusive registration, and that was not shown here.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Apr 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275893</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>