https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275968 A coined and fanciful mark such as SUPERFLAME can acquire exclusive proprietary association through prior user and market identification, even if it is not descriptive in ordinary language. Use of Blue Superflame Industries was found likely to misappropriate that goodwill because the added words did not remove the dominant feature of SUPERFLAME. Injunctive protection and delivery up of infringing labels and related tooling were therefore warranted. However, an account of profits was refused because actual passing off of the goods themselves was not proved, as the appliance branding and labels differed and the evidence did not support such a finding. en-us Thu, 07 Nov 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Oct 2018 11:49:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275968 A coined and fanciful mark such as SUPERFLAME can acquire exclusive proprietary association through prior user and market identification, even if it is not descriptive in ordinary language. Use of Blue Superflame Industries was found likely to misappropriate that goodwill because the added words did not remove the dominant feature of SUPERFLAME. Injunctive protection and delivery up of infringing labels and related tooling were therefore warranted. However, an account of profits was refused because actual passing off of the goods themselves was not proved, as the appliance branding and labels differed and the evidence did not support such a finding. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 07 Nov 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275968