<?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>2018 (7) TMI 2385 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466318</link>
    <description>Plaintiffs proved unauthorized online use of their registered mark leading to trademark infringement, passing off and unfair competition; evidence of reproduced blogs and untraceable authors supported finding of misuse and risk to investors, so a declaration and permanent injunction were granted restraining specified defendants from using the marks. The court recognised the marks as well known domestically and internationally and held that unauthorised articles authored in the mark&#039;s name infringe exclusive trademark rights, causing potential monetary loss. The suit was decreed against two defendants as prayed; plaintiffs may sue other unidentified defendants separately if they locate contact details.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2026 20:23:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=883290" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 2385 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466318</link>
      <description>Plaintiffs proved unauthorized online use of their registered mark leading to trademark infringement, passing off and unfair competition; evidence of reproduced blogs and untraceable authors supported finding of misuse and risk to investors, so a declaration and permanent injunction were granted restraining specified defendants from using the marks. The court recognised the marks as well known domestically and internationally and held that unauthorised articles authored in the mark&#039;s name infringe exclusive trademark rights, causing potential monetary loss. The suit was decreed against two defendants as prayed; plaintiffs may sue other unidentified defendants separately if they locate contact details.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466318</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>