Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The plaintiffs would state that the said products of the plaintiffs have become distinctive of the plaintiffs in India as else where by virtue of :-

"i. transborder reputation, ii. extensive visibility of the product both by way of use in India and abroad, iii. stocking of the Plaintiffs products by some luggage dealers for second sale of the product on behalf of airlines crew, sailors and other travellers.

iv. by way of advertisements in international and inflight magazines and duty free shopping catalogs, v. by way of the widely publicized product launch event in 1995, vi. by way of Newsletter and trade notices.

18. The pleadings extracted above would give an idea about the nature of the controversy between the parties. The plaintiffs claim copyright in the drawings B, B-1 and B-2 and according to the plaintiffs the second defendant had copied the drawings and had produced suitcases in three dimension and thus has infringed the copyrights of the plaintiffs in the drawings. The second point raised is that the second defendant is guilty of passing off the suit cases of the plaintiffs as that of their own and second defendant is causing loss to the plaintiffs. To buttress their case, the plaintiffs have stated that they have been able to establish considerable transborder reputation by making wide advertisements and their products are used by a very large section of businessmen who travel extensively all over the globe. And in parenthesis the plaintiffs would refer to the trade dress with reference to the suit cases and would state that it is distinctive of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs have also relied upon the result of their market survey. The plaintiffs pray for injunction pending the suit. The second defendant would state that plaintiffs have not been having consistent stand. One case is set up in the plaint and another in rejoinder and yet another at the time of the oral submissions. In the plaint, the plaintiffs put forth their case on the basis of statute and then on common law. The plaintiffs invoked the provisions of Indian Copyright Act, 1957 for the purpose of showing that the plaintiffs had introduced a suit case in the year 1993 called the System 4 Delux and the suit case was manufactured on the basis of the drawings B, B-1 and B-2. According to the plaintiffs, the defendants' suit case is a three dimensional representation of the drawings B, B-1 and B-2. According to the plaintiff, they constitute original artistic work. The plaintiffs referred to the passing off on the basis of common law. According to the plaintiffs, the trade mark and trade name Samsonite is a very world famous name and it enjoins statutory protection in 59 countries. The main features in System 4 Deluxe are unique and distinctive. They say:-