By- Nidhi Shah (UG Law Student) & Dr. Aseem Chandra Paliwal (Associate Professor of Law), Unitedworld School of Law Karnavati University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat
TRADEMARK LAW AND PARODY IN INDIA: AN OVERVIEW
The law governing trademarks in India has gone through a substantial metamorphosis, starting with the Merchandise Marks Act of 1889, evolving into the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act of 1958, and finally culminating in the Trade Marks Act of 1999. Such advancement has ensured proper regulation of trademarks in India concerning international treaties , for instance, the TRIPS Agreement. The emphasis of 1999 Act is primarily the protection of the trademark – trademark owner’s rights by preventing unauthorized use, infringement of brands and unfair competition. Commercially, trademarks are very important assets to businesses because it helps them build their reputation and eliminate the obstacles consumer marks created by counterfeit and confusingly similar goods.
All the same, within this context, trademark parody remains a challenge with the increasing social media domain along with the expression and speech principles. Trademark parody is the humorous or satirical imitation of a trademark that is widely known and used in media, advertising, social activism, and entertainment. Concerns regarding the dilution of trademark value and brand diminishment, blend with consumer confusion arising from trademark misrepresentation make parody legally questionable. In contrast to the US, the UK, or the EU, Indian laws do not accept trademark parody as a domain of fair-use and hence result in differing judicial decisions regarding trademark parody matters. This results in juxtaposed outcomes where some courts are overly protective of trademarks, while others recognize some degree of benign public interest underlying the parody.
The non-commercial parody which is in the public interest and need not be commercialized, can be defended under one’s right to free speech as established in the landmark case Tata Sons Ltd. v. Greenpeace International (2011). This is fundamentally different in context to PepsiCo Inc. v. Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages, which showcased parody which was much more commercially derivative and leaned towards protecting domineering brands, even at the expense of humor or satire. The absence of clear legislative guidelines on trademark parody poses increasing legal challenges for a wide array of stakeholders. It significantly amplifies litigation risks and corporate overreach. Amidst the rise of digital media, influencer marketing, and meme culture, the legal status of trademark parody remains unsettled in India. The focus of this dissertation is to look into the relationship between trademark parody and Indian law, contrast it with international standards, and look for gaps in regulatory frameworks that need to be amended to ensure the freedom of expression while protecting trademark rights.
RESEARCH PROBLEM AND JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY
India's trademark law issue revolves defenses of fair use not being exhaustive of trademark parody. In India constitutional provisions of the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) is subject to limitation under clause (2) which speaks of domain of trademark rights. Judicial activism has been pervasive since some Courts have shown willingness to defend free speech like in Tata Sons Ltd v. Greenpeace International, while denying commercial context parody defenses in PepsiCo Inc. v. Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages. The absence of legal recognition pertaining to judicial parody results in inconsistent judicial decision making that tends to side with brand owners, aggravating the problem of censorship in advertising and other forms of brand communication that is critical to creativity, satire, parody, or even comparative advertising.
Parody as a legal discourse is becoming more accepted within the European Union and is defended within the First Amendment in the USA. India’s parodying laws are not nearly as advanced or specified which leads to creativity being stifled as court systems tend to be more lenient to trademark owners. Without clear differentiation marks between trademark infringement and parody, intellectual ingenuity is restrained, particularly within satirical and artistic domains. It is the intent of this research to reform Indian trademark laws by including parody as a form of defense within the boundaries of constitutionally guaranteed free expression unlike branded property dominion.
1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND QUESTIONS
This exploratory study will be guided by the following objectives:
• Investigate the constitutional scope of parody trademark prosecution in Indian Jurisprudence.
• Analyze the controversies on trademark parody in the domain of free speech.
• Study the parody of trademarks in India’s perspective against the USA, UK, and EU.
• Determine the shortcomings of Indian trademark law regarding parody.
• Provide counteractive policies that lean in favor of trademark infringement.
The questions this dissertation intends to answer set forth:
1. What is the approach of Indian trademark law towards trademark parody?
2. What are the most important recent court rulings in India on trademark parody?
3. How do other jurisdictions resolve the dispute between trademark rights and parody?
4. What modifications to the Indian law would make the trademark parody definition more unambiguous?
1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This dissertation applies a mixture of doctrinal and comparative legal study methodologies:
• On Indian Trademark Law Research: This method gathers and evaluates the statutes, case precedents, and constitutional documents relating to trademark law and the discourse of or free speech in India.
• International Comparisons: The dissertation considers how other countries such as the USA, UK, and EU portray trademark parody to analyze prospects for India’s legal or policy changes.
This research is limited to legal scholarship regarding the intersection of trademark law with freedom of expression. No attention is paid to the business or marketing side. The study will analyze the shift in trademark parody within the scope of Indian law, suggesting amendatory reforms to the Trade Marks Act to adopt parody as a permissible defense, thus claiming India’s intellectual property system would be in harmony with global standards while also maintaining suffocating protections over trademark interests.
.jpeg)
