The recent death of
The death of
Indian
The
Colour based discrimination has been prevalent in our society since time immemorial and even today in the 21st century, a person is rejected for marriage solely on the ground that he has a darker skin tone and the lighter skin makes acceptance more likely, and even more so for women. Even though society is getting educated but still the discrimination exists on the basis of colour.
And hence, due to societal pressure, people are made to think that they are not beautiful and sadly, light skin is not just promoted by the "fairness" product market but also by the individuals
Almost 90% of all advertisements show lighter-skinned models. Consequently, lighter skin is depicted as the parameter of beauty by the media. Fairness is not just desired by women who can resort to
The Perennial Tiff Between HUL And Emami2
The dispute in relation to trademark first arose when HUL applied for the trademark for 'Glow & Lovely' and 'Glow & Handsome' in
Keeping track of the social media outrage and the black lives matter movement, various cosmetic businesses turned towards making their brand less discriminatory. In wake of the above,
Days after this announcement, Emami issued a press statement threatening legal action against HUL for violating its alleged rights for its mark 'Emami Glow and Handsome'. HUL being aggrieved by the said statement moved an urgent application before the
The Current Issue Over Filing Of Name "Glow And Handsome" As Trademark
The HUL after moving an urgent application before the Hon'ble Court submitted sales figures for marketing and advertising the trademark "Fair and Lovely" for its products and the same was backed by evidence and therefore, due to these propelling factors, HUL was entitled to an ad-interim injunction at this stage.
The Court after duly analyzing the facts and contentions made by both the parties held that on the outset, HUL appears to be a prior adopter and user of the mark "Glow & Handsome". HUL has already launched its goods in the market with that trademark, and so far as Emami is concerned, it is undoubtedly at the stage of adopting "a process of launching" its goods under the trademark "Glow & Handsome".
The bench referred to HUL's suit under Section 142 of the Trade Marks Act filed against Emami and directed Emami to give a minimum seven days prior notice to HUL in case any action was launched by it towards infringement or passing off in respect of the plaintiff's use of the trademark "Glow & Handsome".
Conclusion
The
Resting to the present case between HUL and Emami, the final verdict is yet to come so as to ascertain who is the rightful owner of the trademark "Glow and Handsome".
Footnotes
1. Article 15 (1) The
2.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Mr
King, Stubb & Kasiva
Unit-14, Ground Floor,
DLF Tower-A,
Jasola
Tel: 1141318190
Fax: 1141329569
E-mail: sindhuja@ksandk.com
URL: ksandk.com/
© Mondaq Ltd, 2020 - Tel. +44 (0)20 8544 8300 - http://www.mondaq.com, source