The Delhi High Court Yesterday (May 1st) held that global pharmaceuticals giant Pfizer is the exclusive and registered proprietor of the trademark ‘VIAGRA’, a drug used to treat erectile dysfunction.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court delivered a significant verdict reaffirming Pfizer’s exclusive rights over the trademark ‘VIAGRA’. This ruling, rendered by Justice Sanjeev Narula, not only underscores Pfizer’s proprietary claims but also sheds light on the complexities of trademark protection in the pharmaceutical sector.
According to the judgment, Pfizer’s meticulous efforts in coining the term ‘Viagra’ and establishing its distinctiveness have been pivotal in securing its legal ownership over the trademark. Justice Narula highlighted that ‘Viagra’ holds no intrinsic meaning in the dictionary, thereby emphasizing Pfizer’s role in popularizing and defining the term within the pharmaceutical landscape.
The court further emphasized Pfizer’s sustained usage of the mark, bolstered by an extensive online presence and supported by a plethora of documentary evidence, including international registrations and regulatory approvals. Particularly noteworthy was the inclusion of ‘Viagra’ in renowned lexicons such as the Oxford dictionary, serving as a testament to the term’s widespread recognition and Pfizer’s association with it.
Quoting the court’s observations,
“The culmination of these efforts in successful registration in India conclusively proves their [Pfizer’s] exclusive ownership as the registered proprietor of the trademark within Indian territory from the application date, establishing a legal presumption of validity and ownership that remains uncontested by the Defendants.”
The court’s ruling extended beyond mere recognition of Pfizer’s rights; it issued a permanent injunction against Renovision Exports Private Limited, prohibiting the sale of its homeopathic medicine under the trademark ‘VIGOURA’. This injunction, as per the court’s directive, encompasses all activities related to the manufacturing, marketing, and promotion of products bearing marks deceptively similar to Pfizer’s ‘VIAGRA’.
The intent behind such an injunction is clear: to safeguard Pfizer’s trademark from any potential infringement or misrepresentation in the market.
“The Defendants or anyone acting on their behalf are permanently restrained from manufacturing, selling, or offering for sale, marketing, advertising, or in any other manner using the mark ‘VIGOURA’ or any mark deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s trademark ‘VIAGRA’ in relation to any of their goods as would amount to infringement or passing off of the Plaintiff’s registered mark ‘VIAGRA’.”
-Court
Justice Narula asserted that the mark VIGOURA bears a deceptive resemblance to VIAGRA and that the defendants’ utilization of this mark constitutes a case of passing off. This pivotal ruling came in response to a lawsuit initiated by Pfizer, wherein the pharmaceutical giant contended that Renovision’s marketing and sale of products labeled as “Nervine Tonic for Men” and “Homeopathic Medicine Invented in Germany” under the trademark VIGOURA infringed upon Pfizer’s trademark rights.
Subsequent investigations unearthed a range of VIGOURA products, including variants like VIGOURA 2000, VIGOURA 5000, and VIGOURA 1000, being peddled by the defendant-company. Pfizer argued that the deliberate adoption of the VIGOURA mark by Renovision was a calculated effort to ride on the coattails of VIAGRA’s well-established goodwill and reputation.
In response, Renovision posited in its written statement that VIGOURA 1000 specifically targeted vitality and menstrual regulation in women, thereby distinguishing it from Pfizer’s erectile dysfunction medication. The company further contended that VIGOURA 2000 and VIGOURA 5000 were formulated as non-steroid aphrodisiacs within the realm of homeopathy, operating on distinct principles from conventional allopathic drugs like VIAGRA.
According to Renovision, the gradual onset of effects after prolonged usage of VIGOURA, as opposed to VIAGRA’s immediate relief, along with differences in composition and mode of action, mitigated the likelihood of consumer confusion. The assertion was made that both VIAGRA and VIGOURA, being prescription drugs, would be discerned by consumers as distinct entities catering to disparate medical needs.
Upon thorough deliberation of the arguments presented, the Court ruled decisively in Pfizer’s favor, issuing a permanent injunction against Renovision. Additionally, the Court ordered Renovision to pay nominal damages amounting to Rs 3 lakh as restitution for the trademark infringement.
This ruling not only reinforces Pfizer’s trademark rights but also underscores the importance of safeguarding against deceptive practices in the pharmaceutical industry. It reaffirms the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the integrity of intellectual property rights, thereby fostering an environment conducive to fair competition and innovation.
This verdict not only upholds the sanctity of Pfizer’s intellectual property but also sets a precedent for robust trademark protection within the pharmaceutical domain. It underscores the significance of brand identity in an industry where trust and credibility play pivotal roles in consumer decision-making.
Moreover, it reaffirms the judiciary’s commitment to preserving the rights of innovators and creators, thereby fostering an environment conducive to innovation and competition.
READ/DOWNLOAD ORDER-
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Trademarks
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
