New Delhi: The Delhi Press Patra Prakashan, publisher of the popular children’s magazine Champak, has moved Delhi High Court against the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) for naming a robotic dog, introduced as an attraction during the ongoing Indian Premier League (IPL), as Champak.
According to Bar and Bench, the publisher has claimed that BCCI has infringed its registered trademark by naming the robodog Champak. Justice Saurabh Banerjee issued notice in this matter and will take it up for hearing again on July 9.
Advocate Amit Gupta, representing the petitioner, submitted that the Champak magazine is quite popular among children and the use of its name for the product introduced by BCCI is a clear infringement of the publisher’s registered mark.
“This AI tool [robotic dog] has been named as Champak. The IPL has been going on. The product was introduced earlier but it was named later on April 23 purportedly based on fan voting,” Gupta submitted, adding there are regular reports about this ‘robotic dog’ in the media.
The Court asked what harm is caused to the publishers by such use. In response, Gupta said the use is unauthorised.
During the hearing, the Court also inquired whether ‘Chiku’ is a character in the Champak magazine and same is also used as a nickname for cricketer Virat Kohli. When Gupta accepted that ‘Chiku’ is indeed a character, the Court observed that no litigation was initiated with regard to such use.
“When did you come to know about that? It is a fact you knew about that but you have not initiated against that,” the judge said.
Gupta responded that people generally give nicknames on the basis of characters in comic books and movies.
The Court then asked the counsel to explain how commercial exploitation and unfair advantage can be claimed in the case. Gupta said that the publisher is a registered owner of the mark and the cricket body is using it without authorisation.
“My magazine is known for animal characters. Let us take the product to be distinct but the very use is causing detriment. It is causing dilution,” he added.
However, the Court remarked that there was no allegation of unfair advantage in the pleadings.
“There is nothing on record that there is something which is causing some dilution and detriment,” it said.
Gupta then argued that advertising and marketing of the product was sufficient to show commercial exploitation.
“IPL is a commercial venture,” he added.
At this point, the Court said the publisher could earn royalties by going against Kohli for using the nickname ‘Chiku’. However, Gupta said the cricketer was not launching a product.
“In case he were to launch a product ‘Chiku’, that would be a commercial exploitation,” the counsel said.
On the other hand, Gupta said Champak is a registered mark and thus its commercial use would be infringement.
Senior Advocate J Sai Deepak, appearing for the BCCI, submitted that Champak is the name of a flower.
“Robotic dog is associated with a character of a series and not the magazine,” he added, while referring to the television show ‘Tarak Mehta ka Oolta Chashma’.
The Court ultimately issued notice in the case for a later date, but said it was not convinced that this is a case fit for passing ex-parte interim injunction.
