Indian Express

Express India

Screen

Loksatta

Express Cricket

Kashmir Live

Biz Publications
 
| Make this your homepage | Feedback

Reading the fine print

Surabhi Agarwal
Posted online: Thursday , May 08, 2008 at 00:03 hrs
Updated On: Thursday , May 08, 2008 at 00:03 hrs


Font Size

Print

Feedback

Email

Discuss
Rate This Article
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Rating:  0

Whether the Coca-Cola and Bisleri spat is buried forever or some fizz still remains is difficult to guess, but a clear lesson is that companies need to guard their intellectual property rights carefully.

It all started when Bisleri’s chairman Ramesh Chauhan came to know that Coca-Cola was trying to register the Maaza trademark in countries other than India. Chauhan had sold Maaza to Coca-Cola in 1993 along with his other brands like Thums Up, Goldspot and Limca from his stable. Subsequently, the companies had signed an agreement over the ownership of the Maaza trademark in India.

However, Chauhan says that he had sold the rights of Maaza only for India. “We have asked Coca-Cola to pay us compensation of $5 million and give us in writing that they would not register our trademark anywhere in the world,” he told FE. Coca-Cola had made attempts in the past to register the Maaza trademark in Holland and Turkey, but had subsequently withdrawn its applications.

On the other hand, Coca-Cola says that it never signed a non-competing agreement that could have prevented it from registering the trademark elsewhere. “Though the Chauhans have not entered into a non-compete agreement with Coca-Cola, restraining us from unbridled expansion, we have decided to not register the trademark outside India. We are not registering for moral reasons because he doesn’t want us to register outside,” said the Coca-Cola spokesperson. He added, “The issue is over. We have sent a written statement to Coca-Cola stating that we will not register Maaza trademark in other countries.”

However, this is not the sole case of IPR infringement that has hit corporate India. In another instance, French food company Danone and Indian confectionary major Britannia got into a rough patch over Tiger brand, which is a product of confectionary major Britannia.

Danone has a 25.5% indirect stake through a holding company Associated Biscuits International Holdings (ABIH) in it. The Wadia group and Danone have an equal stake in ABIH. The Wadias accused Danone of registering Tiger brand on its own in over 70 countries without the knowledge of the management board. Britannia filed a court case against Danone in Singapore in May 2007 and there has been no breakthrough on the issue yet.

Why did these two cases hit the headlines? It’s because both Tiger and Maaza are powerful brands in India, contributing significantly to the overall sales of Britannia and...

Single Page Format 1 - 2 - Next
Ads by Google

Post Comments

Comments: (Limit 3,000 characters)
Name
Message
Email ID
Subject
TERMS OF USE:
The views represented here are not neccesarily endorsed by www.financialexpress.com and its allied websites. All messages will be moderated and no message that has inflammatory, abusive, derogatory language or any language deemed unfit for publication by the editor will be displayed. Though it will be endeavoured that as many messages as possible be displayed, there will be time lag between the submission and publication of the messages. The website reserves the right to publish or reject any message.
I agree to the terms of use.

Comments
Shaadi Matrimonials
Get Marriage Proposals by Email EVERYDAY!
Register FREE on Naukri.com.
200000+ Hot Job Openings!
Yatra Offers
10% cash back on Master Card
Send Gifts
Flowers and Gifts
Express Classifieds
Post and view free classifieds ad
Express Astrology
Know what's in the stars for you