The Delhi High Court has recently restricted a news platform called Calcutta Television Network (CTVN) from using the logo of ‘CN’ mark for its news channel that was an imitation of US-based media and news company CNN logo.
Justice C Hari Shankar passed an order of interim injunction after noting that the resemblance in the two logos are such which when members of the public come across them, and would cause a sense of wonderment about a connection/nexus between CNN & CTVN.
The order said that, “The manner in which the defendant has styled its logo, with the C and N joined at the base, each letter otherwise standing erect, is deceptively similar to – and, in fact, prima facie imitative of – the manner in which the plaintiff has styled its logo.”
Further the Court added, it was inclined to hold that Calcutta News has prima facie purposive logo which is as same as that of CNN, “Without intending to trivialize the discussion, the reaction of the average customer, which would, without anything further and by itself, suffice to indicate “likelihood of confusion” and, therefore, infringement, is probably best represented by the now popular “thinking face” emoticon.”
However, the Court dealt with a suit filed by Cable News Network (CNN). It was stated that till 2014, the defendant was conducting its business under the name Uttar Bangla, and further initiated using the name Calcutta News, with the acronym CN in 2014.
Certainly, CNN argued for the design of the defendant’s logo, with the C&N joined at the base, that is clearly similar to its logo and would create confusion.
Further, the Court further stated that the defendant intended to copy the plaintiff’s logo and seek to capitalize on reputation of CNN.
The defendants disputed the claim and even raised objection that Delhi High Court doesn’t have the territorial jurisdiction to deal with the specific case. Under Order 7 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), They filed an application, seeking return of the plaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.
After the consideration in the matter, the Court refused the application of defendant and said that CNN is accessible throughout India and is seen by millions of households in Delhi.
Therefore, the suit would be maintainable before the Delhi High Court under clause (b) of Section 20 of the CPC.
“The commercial activity of the plaintiff is carried out through its news channel. It is a matter of common knowledge that news channels earn revenue based on viewership and that increasing viewership of channels is one of the primary methods by which revenue is earned. The court can also take judicial notice of the fact that, across the plaintiff’s channel, extensive advertisements also figure, including the advertisement of the plaintiff’s channel itself. The plaintiff’s channel is also advertised, independently, within the jurisdiction of this Court.”
Therefore, Justice Hari Shankar concluded that prima facie, a case of passing off also exists against all the defendants.
Therefore, in the issue of infringement, the Court ordered the defendants to not use the trademarks in question or any other mark that is similar to CNN.
