Skip to main content

DOMAIN NAME PROTECTION- OISINI PODDAR AT LEXCLIQ

 DOMAIN NAME PROTECTION- OISINI PODDAR AT LEXCLIQ

Domain names are not protected by Indian law. Therefore, under the Trademark Law of 1999 and the Trademark Regulations of 2002, newly created domain names in India are protected by all individuals or companies. Internationally, domain names are registered as trademarks only by ICANN (Internet Corporation) for their assigned names and numbers. ) Organization.


Internationally, domain names are protected as trademarks by ICANN, along with various international trademark treaties around the world and directly related national trademark law. After the
domain name was registered as a trademark under the Trademark Law of 1999 (“Law”), the owner of the registered domain name has all the rights and powers enjoyed by the registered trademark owners of India. increase. Trademark protection is granted under the provisions of law, including the right to sue for infringement or disclosure. Any person who illegally uses a domain name that is valid under the Act and registered as an existing trademark shall be liable for infringing the trademark of the domain name under Article 29 of the Act.
Trademark protection is also available if the owner of an unregistered trademark has previously used the trademark and has acquired this unique character.

The owner of an unregistered trademark may sue for transfer if another person presents the unregistered trademark as a product and the parties concerned may mislead. The domain name serves as an integral part of any commercial transaction and any commercial activity on the Internet. In particular, companies that work exclusively on online platforms need to protect their domain names. In India, the Trademark Law of 1999 protects domain names around the world. Therefore, registered domain names are protected from trademark infringement, and unregistered domain names are protected from transmission under the law. If the domain name meets all the requirements for trademark registration, the domain name will be registered nationally and internationally. You can register a unique Internet name as a trademark that distinguishes and distinguishes one service or product from another.

The domain name must serve as a trusted source identifier for goods and services registered as trademarks on the Internet. Domain names as trademarks need to be distinguished from all other well-known trademarks and domain names on the Internet so as not to deceive or mislead customers of other companies or violate morals or public order and morals. 

A well-protected domain name is beneficial for the security and profitability of a business, just like an internationally protected trademark. Thus, registration of both the trademark and domain name is necessary.However, the procedure of acquiring a domain name involves no examination of whether it is capable or distinctive of distinguishing itself, unlike trademarks. Descriptive words can be registered as domain names. Some businesses use their registered trademarks as domain names.

Thus, once a domain name is chosen, the holder can apply to obtain trademark protection for the domain name to prevent any third party from using the name. In the absence of a particular law governing domain names, the Trademark Law applies for the same.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more