Paytm vs PayPal- War of the giants heating up
Advertisement
One of the biggest beneficiaries of the demonetization exercise, Paytm has been slapped with a notice of opposition against the registration of a trademark for its two-tone blue colour scheme by its global counterpart, PayPal .
PayPal has raised the objection to Paytm’s logo for being deceptively similar to its ‘earlier trademark’.
Section 21 of theIndian Trademarks Act of 1999 (Act) provides for a time frame of four months, for any person to oppose the advertised application of a trademark. It is under this provision that PayPal has filed the notice of opposition.
PayPal, in its notice, has taken recourse to the following two sections for denial of registration:
Section 9(2)(a) of the Act which provides for deception or confusion as an absolute ground of refusal against registration of the trademark;
Section 11 of the Act which provides for similarity with an ‘earlier trademark’ as a ‘relative’ ground for refusal to grant registration.
While Paypal has several trademarks registered in its name, this one in particular has by itself been ‘objected’ by the Registrar. PayPal has, therefore, ‘opposed’ Paytm’s trademark on the virtue of its ‘earlier trademark’ being ‘well-known’ under Section 2(1)(zg) of the Act.
Singh & Singh Lall & Sethi are representing PayPal while Sigma Legal Services have been representing Paytm before the Registrar, as per online records available with the Trademarks Registry.
Advertisement
PayPal has raised the objection to Paytm’s logo for being deceptively similar to its ‘earlier trademark’.
Section 21 of the
PayPal, in its notice, has taken recourse to the following two sections for denial of registration:
Section 9(2)(a) of the Act which provides for deception or confusion as an absolute ground of refusal against registration of the trademark;
Advertisement
While Paypal has several trademarks registered in its name, this one in particular has by itself been ‘objected’ by the Registrar. PayPal has, therefore, ‘opposed’ Paytm’s trademark on the virtue of its ‘earlier trademark’ being ‘well-known’ under Section 2(1)(zg) of the Act.
Singh & Singh Lall & Sethi are representing PayPal while Sigma Legal Services have been representing Paytm before the Registrar, as per online records available with the Trademarks Registry.
Advertisement
- Should you be worried about the potential side-effects of the Covishield vaccine?
- India T20 World Cup squad: KulCha back on menu, KL Rahul dropped
- Sales of homes priced over ₹4 crore rise 10% in Jan-Mar in top 7 cities: CBRE
- Gold prices fluctuate as geopolitical tensions ease; US Fed meeting, payroll data to affect prices this week
- Best beaches to visit in Goa in 2024
- Nothing Phone (2a) blue edition launched
- JNK India IPO allotment date
- JioCinema New Plans
- Realme Narzo 70 Launched
- Apple Let Loose event
- Elon Musk Apology
- RIL cash flows
- Charlie Munger
- Feedbank IPO allotment
- Tata IPO allotment
- Most generous retirement plans
- Broadcom lays off
- Cibil Score vs Cibil Report
- Birla and Bajaj in top Richest
- Nestle Sept 2023 report
- India Equity Market