By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
Universal Times MagazineUniversal Times MagazineUniversal Times Magazine
  • Home
  • Industries
    • Automobile
    • Aviation
    • Banking
    • Cryptocurrency
    • E- Commerce
    • EdTech
    • Energy and Petroleum
    • Fintech
    • FMCG
    • Information Technology
    • NBFC
    • Oil
    • Pharmacy
    • Telecom
    • Other Business News
  • Blogs
  • World
  • Jobs
  • Careers
  • About us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
Search
Copyright © 2020-2024 Universal Times Magazine. All Rights Reserved.
Reading: Snapdeal fails to get relief in trademark infringement case
Share
Notification
Aa
Universal Times MagazineUniversal Times Magazine
Aa
  • Home
  • Industries
  • Blogs
  • World
  • Jobs
  • Careers
  • About us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
Search
  • Home
  • Industries
    • Automobile
    • Aviation
    • Banking
    • Cryptocurrency
    • E- Commerce
    • EdTech
    • Energy and Petroleum
    • Fintech
    • FMCG
    • Information Technology
    • NBFC
    • Oil
    • Pharmacy
    • Telecom
    • Other Business News
  • Blogs
  • World
  • Jobs
  • Careers
  • About us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
Follow US
  • Home
  • Industries
  • Blogs
  • World
  • Jobs
  • Careers
  • About us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
Copyright © 2020-2024 Universal Times Magazine. All Rights Reserved.

Advertisement

Universal Times Magazine > Blog > E- Commerce > Snapdeal fails to get relief in trademark infringement case
E- Commerce

Snapdeal fails to get relief in trademark infringement case

Gaurav Verma
Last updated: 2022/04/20 at 11:57 AM
Gaurav Verma
Share
4 Min Read
SHARE

Advertisement

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday denied internet based retailer Snapdeal’s application looking for transitory help against Domain name recorders (DNRs) in a brand name encroachment matter.

Snapdeal had prayed for suspension of all registrations granted by these registrars alleging that they infringed its trademark “Snapdeal”.

The court said it can’t confine these DNRs from giving enrollment under the “Snapdeal” brand name since it isn’t passable for it to hold ahead of time that each elective area name containing “Snapdeal” will essentially be encroaching in nature.

An area name enlistment center handles reservation of space names and furthermore allocates IP addresses for those area names. The court, nonetheless, said that DNRs are answerable for guaranteeing that the elective area names they offer encroach on no enlisted brand names. It further expressed that assuming DNRs give business administrations to beguilingly indistinguishable names, they will be expected to take responsibility for brand name encroachment.

A Snapdeal representative said, “We are satisfied to see that the court has held that it is the obligation of the Domain Name Registrars to guarantee that the elective area names presented by them encroach no enlisted brand names. It has additionally held that the DNRs will be considered answerable for brand name encroachment assuming they are giving financier administrations to beguilingly comparable areas. It has, further, requested that the recorders cease any calculation that works in such a way that there is plausible of making accessible encroaching elective space names. The court has reached a resolution that DNRs can’t guarantee safe harbor security in such cases.”

In its appeal under the steady gaze of the court, Snapdeal had looked for a directive against DNRs from offering any space names with its brand name Snapdeal. A solitary appointed authority seat of Justice C. Hari Shankar, while rejecting a break alleviation, said it can’t pass a request to work in future, limiting DNRs from presenting for enrollment any area name that incorporated the string/word ” Snapdeal”, as that would ascribe the court a “special insight that it doesn’t have”. Snapdeal would, consequently, need to essentially request of the court against every space name that it views as encroaching. “This might be a long and bulky activity. There’s nothing anyone can do about it. There is no alternate route to equity,” the court said in the judgment.

Snapdeal said outsiders that have no association with it are enrolling area names with the word/string Snapdeal, taking part in criminal operations, for example, giving fortunate draws through sites working under the said space names and going about as client support communities for Snapdeal’s things without the offended party’s approval.

Press the Bell icon for notifications of all new updates

Advertisement

Sign Up For Daily Newsletter

Be keep up! Get the latest breaking news delivered straight to your inbox.
[mc4wp_form]
By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Gaurav Verma April 20, 2022 April 20, 2022
Share This Article
Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Whatsapp LinkedIn Copy Link
Share
Avatar
By Gaurav Verma
Follow:
Founder
Previous Article RBI asks NBFCs to make additional disclosures under scale-based regulation regime
Next Article Reliance picks majority stake in Abu Jani Sandeep Khosla

Stay Connected

2.2k Followers Like
727 Followers Follow
25.7k Followers Follow
444 Subscribers Subscribe

Advertisement

Advertisement

Latest News

Advertisement

Advertisement

Follow US
Copyright © 2020-2025 Universal Times Magazine. All Rights Reserved.
adbanner
AdBlock Detected
Our site is an advertising supported site. Please whitelist to support our site.
Okay, I'll Whitelist
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?

Subscribe For Latest Updates

Sign up to best of business news, informed analysis and opinions on what matters to you.

Invalid email address
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Thanks for subscribing!