Cal. HC: WB Government Directed to Finalise Minimum Wage of Tea Plantation Workers Within Six Weeks  ||  Delhi HC: Woman Cannot be Held Liable for Her Lover Committing Suicide Due to Love Failure  ||  All. HC: Medical Report Determining Age of Victim in POCSO Cases to be Submitted to Court Promptly  ||  Concerns About Rise in Low-Quality Law Colleges Raised by Bar Council of India  ||  Appointment of Technical Assistants as Assistant Engineers in Tamil Nadu PWD Upheld by Supreme Court  ||  Committee to Examine Issues Relating to Queer Community Constituted by Central Government  ||  Karnataka High Court: Accused can’t be Morally Convicted by Trial Court in Absence of Legal Proof  ||  Supreme Court in Plea for 100% EVM-VVPAT Verification: Human Interference to Create Problems  ||  Bom HC: Person Cannot be Deprived of Right to Sleep by Recording Statements at Unearthly Hours  ||  Supreme Court: Enable E-Filing & Virtual Appearance Facilities At UP District Courts    

TomTom Communications v. TomTom International - (18 Dec 2015)

Kiwis clear the road for TomTom registration

Intellectual Property Rights

The High Court of New Zealand at Auckland dismissed an appeal against registration of the mark ‘TomTom’, by the eponymous maker of satellite navigation equipment. Appellants, holders of the registered trade mark, ‘Tom Tom’ had claimed that use of both marks would cause confusion and later registration was in bad faith. The Court, however noted that evidence relied on by Appellants though showed confusion between the two marks, those who were confused or deceived were unaware of Appellant’s mark. Moreover, both marks were registered for very different services: while TomTom’s mark pertained to satellite, GPS, navigation and apparatus, Appellant’s mark was for marketing and public relations services.

Tags : TOMTOM   NEW ZEALAND   TRADE MARK   CONFUSION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved