Delhi Press drags BCCI Today (April 30) to court over naming IPL’s robotic dog ‘Champak’, claiming trademark theft. Delhi High Court issues notice; next hearing set for July 9.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Delhi Press Patra Prakashan, the famous publisher of the children’s magazine Champak, has filed a case in the Delhi High Court against the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). The reason is that BCCI has named a robotic dog ‘Champak‘ during the Indian Premier League (IPL), and the publisher says this is wrong use of their trademark.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee has now sent a notice on this case. Delhi Press has claimed that BCCI has broken the law by using their registered name Champak without permission. The Court will hear the next part of this matter on July 9.
Advocate Amit Gupta, who is speaking for Delhi Press, told the Court that Champak magazine is very well-known among children in India. He argued that BCCI using the same name for their robotic dog is a clear example of copying their registered name.
Gupta said,
“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,”
-and also added that this robotic dog has been getting regular coverage in the news.
The Court asked the lawyer what kind of harm has come to the publisher because of this name use. Gupta replied that this use is completely without their permission.
He said it is unauthorised.
During the discussion, the Court also brought up another name — ‘Chiku‘.
The Court asked if ‘Chiku‘ is a character in Champak magazine and also the nickname of cricketer Virat Kohli. Gupta agreed that it is true. Then, the judge pointed out that no case was ever filed about that.
The judge said,
“When did you come to know about that? It is a fact you knew about that but you have not initiated against that.”
To this, Gupta explained that in general, people give nicknames based on comic book and movie characters. He said that is a different thing.
ALSO READ: LawChakra Campus Ambassador Program 2.0: Boost Your Legal Career This Summer | Apply Now!
But the Court wanted more clarity. It asked the lawyer to explain how he could claim that there is commercial misuse or unfair benefit in this case. Gupta replied that Delhi Press is the legal owner of the Champak name, and BCCI is using it without any approval.
He said,
“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,”
-meaning that the value of their name is being reduced.
However, the Court was not fully convinced. It pointed out that no solid claim about unfair advantage was made in the written papers.
The Court said,
“There is nothing on record that there is something which is causing some dilution and detriment.”
In response, Gupta argued that just the advertising and marketing of the robotic dog was enough to prove that BCCI is using the Champak name for business gain.
He said,
“IPL is a commercial venture,”
meaning that IPL is all about making money.
At this point, the Court remarked that if Delhi Press wanted, they could have asked for royalties even from Kohli for using the name ‘Chiku’. But Gupta answered that Kohli is not selling any product with that name.
He explained,
“In case he were to launch a product ‘Chiku’, that would be a commercial exploitation.”
Gupta stressed that Champak is a legally registered brand, and any business use of that name without permission is an infringement of their rights.
On the other hand, Senior Advocate J Sai Deepak, speaking for BCCI, argued that Champak is actually just the name of a flower.
He said,
“Robotic dog is associated with a character of a series and not the magazine,”
and also mentioned a popular TV show Tarak Mehta ka Oolta Chashma while making his point.
In the end, the Court sent a notice for the case but said that it is not yet convinced that Delhi Press should get an urgent order to stop BCCI from using the name. So, there will be no ex-parte temporary stop for now.
CASE TITLE:
Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Private Limited vs BCCI & Anr.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI Sanjiv Khanna
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
