Back
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
Sap Se – Appellant
Versus
Intellipaat Software Solutions Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present suit for permanent injunction has been filed by SAP SE against various Defendants who were using the mark SAP as domain names with different variations. Initially, the present suit was filed impleading 26 Defendants, wherein Defendant No. 1- Intellipaat Software Solutions Private Limited, was infringing the Plaintiff's rights in its various software programmes under the name `SAP' and Defendants Nos. 2-24 were intermediaries. The Plaintiff had also impleaded Department of Telecommunications and Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY), of the Union of India as Defendant Nos. 25-26. In addition, Domain Name Registrars (DNRs) GoDaddy.com, LLC and Cloudflare, Inc. were impleaded as Defendant Nos. 27 and 28 to secure the prayer for deactivation of access to the impugned website i.e., www.intellipaat.com. Defendant No. 29- ICICI Bank was also impleaded seeking a direction for freezing the account of Defendant No. 1.
3. The Plaintiff company was incorporated in Germany and adopted the mark SAP in 1972. The grievance in this suit is that the Defendant No.1 i.e., Inte
The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of intellectual property rights, including trademarks and copyrighted materials, under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 and the Ind....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of trademarks and copyrights under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Copyright Act, 1957, and the court's power to grant injuncti....
Unauthorized use of a registered trademark constitutes infringement, and remedies include permanent injunction and costs against infringing parties.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the plaintiff to statutory protection and the grant of injunction for infringement under the Trademark Act, 1999.
In trademark infringement cases, courts cannot grant broad injunctions without identifying specific infringing domains; reliefs must target clearly defined trademarks as per Sections 28(1) and 29 of ....
The court upheld the trademarks' protection against infringement, emphasizing the role of well-known trademarks in deterring cyber-squatting and unauthorized usage.
Intermediaries are liable for trademark infringement if they facilitate domain name registrations that include registered trademarks, and blanket injunctions against future registrations require spec....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
