Recovery & Restoration Of FB Group Ownership Can’t Be Termed As Trademark Dispute: Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court today stated the recovery & restoration of ownership of a group on Facebook can’t be termed as a dispute relating to trademark and intellectual property.

A single bench of Justice Nitin Sambre passed the order on March 24 where a copy of which was made available on Monday, in an application filed by ‘The Himalayan Club’ against an August 2022 order passed by a civil court refusing to hear its suit seeking declaration of ownership of a Facebook group and that only it has the exclusive rights to control and manage it.

The civil court held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the suit as the matter pertains to trademark and intellectual property.

According to the application, the petitioner club, founded in February 1928, asked one of its office-bearers, Kanwar Singh, to create internet-based chat groups for better social media outreach.
Singh created a Facebook group named after the club on the plaintiff’s instructions.

However, Singh took undue advantage of his position and started claiming that the plaintiff had no connection to the said FB group and tried to usurp control of the said group.

Justice Sambre noted that the FB group is in no way claimed to be a registered trademark of the plaintiff club which Singh allegedly infringed.

The court said that “Rather the plaintiff has sought a declaration that it is the owner of the Facebook Group and based on the same, ancillary reliefs are claimed. The Facebook Group which is claimed to be of the plaintiff is an internet-based social media platform which provides for members to exchange views, and ideas and to post experiences, messages, and photographs.”

The order stated that “As such, it cannot be said that the Facebook platform is a trademark or copyright. It cannot be said that the recovery and restoration of a Facebook Group can be termed to be a dispute relating to trademark.”

The HC while quashing the civil court’s order said the lower court’s conclusion that it has no jurisdiction to hear the suit as the dispute pertains to trademark and intellectual property, can’t be accepted.

Justice Sambre stated that “The civil court has misguided itself by inferring that the ownership of Facebook Group amounts to trademark and as such the dispute pertains to intellectual property.”
Therefore, The high court said that the civil court has the jurisdiction to hear the suit filed by ‘The Himalayan Club’ against Singh.