Skip to content

CS Professional · Intellectual Property Rights - Law and Practice · Types of Intellectual Property

A GI for a certain carpet, registered with Hastakala Samiti as registered proprietor, has several registered authorised users in the region. Zenith Rugs, located outside the region, sells carpets labelled with the GI name, though they are not made there, and consumers are misled. Which statement is correct under the GI Act, 1999?

Zenith Rugs infringes the GI because using it on goods not from the territory in a way that misleads the public is infringement under the 1999 Act. The registered proprietor or an authorised user can sue. A small 'style' disclaimer does not cure the misleading use.

  1. AOnly the registered proprietor may sue; authorised users have no standing in any case
  2. BNo infringement arises because Zenith Rugs is not an authorised user
  3. CThe sale is lawful if Zenith Rugs adds the word 'style' in small print
  4. DUsing the GI on goods not originating in the territory in a way that misleads the public is infringement, and the registered proprietor or an authorised user can sueCorrect

Explanation

Infringement includes use of a GI by an unauthorised person that indicates or suggests the goods originate in a place other than the true origin, misleading the public. Both the registered proprietor and authorised users may institute infringement proceedings. Adding 'style' does not cure misleading use, and being a non-user is exactly why it is infringement.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Types of Intellectual Property shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Types of Intellectual PropertyFree diagnostic mock

More Types of Intellectual Property questions