Trademark Dispute Heats Up: Delhi Press Challenges BCCI's Use Of 'Champak' For IPL Robotic Dog

Trademark Dispute Heats Up: Delhi Press Challenges BCCI's Use Of 'Champak' For IPL Robotic Dog

Introduction

The Delhi High Court is hearing a trademark dispute between Delhi Press Patra Prakashan, the publisher of the children's magazine Champak, and the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) over the use of the name 'Champak' for a robotic dog featured during the Indian Premier League (IPL).

Factual Background

Delhi Press alleged that BCCI's use of the name 'Champak' for the robotic dog infringes its trademark. The publisher argued that Champak is a well-known children's magazine and the use of the name 'Champak' for the robotic dog causes dilution of its trademark. BCCI, on the other hand, contended that it cannot give an undertaking not to use the name 'Champak' due to commercial considerations.

Procedural Background

The case came up before Justice Saurabh Banerjee, who directed the parties to complete the pleadings and listed the case for further consideration in September. During the hearing, Delhi Press expressed willingness to settle the dispute, but BCCI refused to enter into mediation.

Issues

1. Trademark Infringement: Whether BCCI's use of the name 'Champak' for the robotic dog infringes Delhi Press's trademark.

2. Commercial Exploitation: Whether BCCI's use of the name 'Champak' amounts to commercial exploitation or unfair advantage.

Contentions of Parties

Delhi Press's Contentions: Delhi Press argued that the use of the name 'Champak' for the robotic dog causes dilution of its trademark and amounts to commercial exploitation. The publisher also submitted that it is willing to settle the dispute if the BCCI agrees not to use the name 'Champak' in the future.

BCCI's Contentions: BCCI contended that it cannot give an undertaking not to use the name 'Champak' due to commercial considerations. BCCI also argued that the purpose of the suit is to settle the matter with Delhi Press for money.

Reasoning & Analysis

The court noted that no allegation of commercial exploitation was made in the pleadings and asked Delhi Press to clarify its position. The court also observed that the use of the name 'Champak' for the robotic dog may not amount to commercial exploitation or unfair advantage.

Final Outcome

The Delhi High Court directed the parties to complete the pleadings and listed the case for further consideration in September. The court will hear the case and determine whether BCCI's use of the name 'Champak' for the robotic dog infringes Delhi Press's trademark.

Implications

The case highlights the importance of protecting trademarks and the potential consequences of unauthorized use. It also emphasizes the need for parties to negotiate and settle disputes amicably.

In this case BCCI was represented by Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Advocate.