The Bombay High Court recently refused to quash and set aside an order passed by the Registrar of Trade Marks, which refused to recognise “Tik Tok” as a well known Mark under the Trade Marks Act, noting that the social media application is banned in India.
Single-judge Justice Manish Pitale said that the fact that the app is banned in India, as considered by the Registrar while refusing to declare Tik Tok a renowned Mark, is a “relevant factor” as described under section 11(6) of the Trade Marks Act. The said provision allows a Registrar to consider any material as a relevant fact while deciding to declare a Mark as a well known one.
“This Court is of the opinion that the banning of the application of the petitioner i.e. TikTok by the Government of India, while exercising power under the Information Technology Act and Rules, is indeed a relevant fact taken into consideration by the Registrar. It was admitted on behalf of the petitioner that the ban still operates. Merely because the ban on certain other applications has been lifted cannot be a ground for the petitioner to claim that the impugned order is rendered erroneous,” the judge said in the order passed on June 10.
The judge further noted that Tik Tok was banned in India citing the threat to its sovereignty and integrity, which are serious issues.
“The reasons why the application of the petitioner bearing the trade mark TikTok has been banned pertain to the sovereignty and integrity of India, its Defence and Public Order. These are serious matters, which cannot be ignored and therefore, it is found that the respondent did take into consideration relevant factors while passing the impugned order,” the judge observed.
The petitioner app contended that the main reason recorded in the impugned order was that TikTok was found to be controversial by the Government of India and it stood banned in India.
It was argued that the instant order was passed without reasons and by merely citing certain press releases of the Government of India, without any application of mind.
The judge noted that the Registrar while passing the order impugned, found that there was material indicating that the ban imposed on TikTok was also in the backdrop of concerns regarding data privacy of the users and the fact that the servers of the said application TikTok are located in China.
“The said respondent also referred to certain instances indicating that pictures of some women and girls downloaded from TikTok were found to be morphed and that there were cases of cyber bullying and sexually explicit context,” the judge noted.
With these observations, the judge dismissed the plea filed by Tik Tok.
Appearance:
Advocates Swati Mittal, Manisha Singh, Abhai Pandey, Anju Agrawal, Gautam Kumar, Ritika Agrawal, Paulome Metha, Shubhankar Sharma and Ishvendra Tiwari instructed by Sonal Doshi & Co. appeared for the Petitioner.
Advocates Yashodeep Deshmukh, Leena Patil and V Deshmukh represented the Registrar.
Case Title: TikTok Limited vs Registrar of Trade Marks (Commercial Miscellaneous Petition 10 of 2024)
Click Here To Read/Download Judgment
