Recently, the Delhi Trademark Office accepted the application for the registration of the trademark “CHUTIYARAM” under Class 30 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Published in the Trademark Journal on Monday, the decision has provoked discussion among intellectual property law practitioners with regard to the process of approval and the potential legal complications of permitting such a mark.
However, concerns persist regarding how the mark obviated scrutiny under Section 9(2)(c) of the Trade Marks Act, which forbids the registration of trademarks that are scandalous, obscene, or contrary to public morality. The decision has provoked questions about the principles applied by the Trademark Registry when assessing applications that contain words with potentially offensive connotations.
Adding to the controversy, the order stressed that the mark was recognized despite the absence of representation for four hearings. This procedural lapse has led to assumptions about whether the process of approval was adequately thorough.
A search of the Trademark Registry’s website revealed that the applicant, Sadhna Goswami, has also submitted applications for other marks, including “Chutiyawale” and “Chutiyalal,” further escalating debates over the ethical and moral considerations around the approval of such trademark.
The Issue
The primary concern is about the correctness of granting trademark protection to a word that is generally considered derogatory in Hindi. The word “Chutiyaram” carries an abusive connotation in colloquial usage, making its approval a matter of considerable public interest and legal analysis.
Intellectual property experts are of the opinion that the process of approval should have considered the potential harm that results from allowing such terms to be commercialized. The decision could set a precedent wherein similar applications for abusive or obscene words are accepted, weakening the protective mechanisms intended to check the misuse of the trademark system.
The Offensive Title and the Trademark Office’s Observations
Under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, Section 9(2)(c) clearly forbids the registration of trademarks that contain outrageous or obscene material. Previous judicial interpretations of this section have highlighted that trademarks should align with principles of public ethics and decency.
In various cases, courts have ruled against the registration of words and phrases that could potentially offend social or cultural sensibilities. The acceptance of “CHUTIYARAM” disputes this well-established legal principle, leading to concerns about whether the trademark office sufficiently evaluated the consequences of approving such a term.
Legal experts indicate that the acceptance of this mark might be contested in higher forums, leading to court intervention. If challenged, the courts may have to decide whether the mark violates the moral and ethical norms that the trademark law seeks to uphold.
The Backdrop
The dispute regarding the approval of “CHUTIYARAM” stems from the broader debate over freedom of expression versus public morality. While trademark law allows companies to protect their brand identity, it also imposes restrictions to ensure that trademarks do not offend public sensibilities.
The fact that similar applications, such as “Chutiyawale” and “Chutiyalal,” have been filed suggests that the applicant is purposely attempting to push the boundaries of what is acceptable under Indian trademark law. This raises questions about whether businesses should be permitted to capitalize on potentially offensive language in branding.
Conclusion
The acceptance of “CHUTIYARAM” as a trademark has triggered a debate that extends beyond intellectual property law and into the sphere of public morality and legal ethics. The decision emphasizes the need for rigorous scrutiny when assessing trademarks that could be considered offensive or unacceptable.
As the controversy progresses, legal experts opine that this decision may be contested in court. If the mark is revoked, it will reaffirm the principles hallowed in Section 9(2)(c) of the Trade Marks Act. Conversely, if it is endorsed, it could pave the way for further provocative trademarks, possibly changing the environment of intellectual property law in India.
Regardless of the outcome, the case of “CHUTIYARAM” serves as a crucial reminder of the delicate balance between commercial branding and social responsibility.
About Author
Ananda Murthy JS is an English teacher in Hyderabad. His teaching experience spans more than 30 years, which includes his stint as an IGCSE teacher in the Maldives, lecturer in English for Intermediate students, writer and editor/language specialist, and IELTS, GRE and TOEFL trainer. He also provides English coaching to students appearing for CAT, IELTS, GRE and TOEFL privately in Hyderabad. Ananda has proficiency in editing SWOT analyses, market forecast and other reports, conducting Effective English sessions, and imparting training in Business English. He also write business blogs, key word dense articles and original articles on various topics.