Page | 1

BANARAS HINDU UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF LAW
SEMESTER X

PROJECT
FOR
Trademark law and design

“Protection of the trademark under the TRIPS Agreement”

Under the Supervision of:

Ms. Abhishek Rai
Asst. Professor, faculty of Law ,
Law school, BHU

Submitted by:-
NAME:-Kumar Abhishek
ROLL NO:- 15225BLT041
ENROLLMENT NO.:-374853
SEMESTER:-10th
 Page | 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my gratitude to my respected sir Mr.

Abhishek Rai who gave me the opportunity to do this wonderful
project on the topic “PROTECTION OF TRADEMARK UNDER
THE TRIPS AGREEMENT”. The project helped me learn how
to do proper Research and i learned about many new things while
doing the project.
I would also like to thank my parents and friends who helped me
complete this project within the deadline.
 Page | 3

INDEX

1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………….4
2. TRADEMARK-A CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS…………………………….5
3. DEVELOPMENT OF TRADEMARL LAW DUE TO LIBERALISATION
AND GLOBALISATION…………………………………………………….7
4. INTERNATIONAL LAW RELATING TO TRADEMARK LAW………….8
5. PROTECTION OF TRIPS UNDER TRIPS AGREEMENT…………………9
6. PROTECTION ACCORDED TO CONVECTIONAL TRADEMARK……..11
7. COCLUSION…………………………………………………………………13
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………….14

LIST OF CASES
1. PFIZER PRODUCTS INC. VS.NEERAJ FOOD PRODUCRTS.
2. DAIMLER BENZ VS.HYBO HINDUSTAN
3. WHIRLPHOOL COMPANY AND ANR. VS N R DONGRE.
4. PHILLIP MORRIS VS URUGUAY
5. BRITISH AMERICAN TABACCO VS ATTORNEY GENERAL.
 Page | 4

INTRODUCTION

This research work on the subject “PROTECTION OF TRADEMARK UNEDER THE TRIPS
AGREEMENT” is of immense importance in view of the several infirmities and draw backs
in implementation of the existing laws. Out of all the Intellectual Property Rights, the trade
mark is the only property which can be retained permanently as long as it is renewed. World is
constantly changing, apart from the physical phenomenon this change is attributed to various
inventions and developments in trade and commerce. These inventions, advertising materials,
books etc., are part of the human minds backed by the intellectual labour. The products of the
great minds are protected throughout the world by legislations. The necessity and amendments
to the existing Trade Mark Act has arisen due to globalization and in order to curtail the unfair
trade practices. Companies spent enormous amount of money for the promotion of their goods
and when the particular products and brand names become famous, the undersized businessmen
and general public try to imitate the same to encash the goodwill and reputation established by
the reputed companies. Therefore, the brand name becomes famous and more often the product
itself becomes synonym for the brand name.
For instance, “XEROX” which has become synonym for the photocopy and also some of the
similar Indian names and famous brands like “DALDA” have become synonyms for the similar
range of products. As India is the signatory to TRIPs agreement, it is bound to incorporate the
international law and its covenants into the local laws. In view of that the Trade and
Merchandise Act, 1958 is transformed to a new act named as the Trademarks Act, 1999. The
question of passing off and infringement arises when someone is imitating the brand name of
the true owner in order to encash the goodwill and reputation of the said brand name.
Historically speaking, the Trademarks Registration Act of 1875 (UK) has created a legal
register of marks and the first Trademarks Registry in the world, which opened in London in
1876. The Trademark law was consolidated in 1883 and the Trademarks Act of 1905 gave the
first statutory definition of a ‘trademark’. In 1938 it saw further legal changes, which had major
effect on trade mark registration. As regards to India, the Parliament has enacted the
Trademarks Act 1999 by substituting the existing Trade and Merchandise Act 1958 and the
Government has framed the Trademarks Rules 2002 (with effect from September 15, 2003) to
ensure adequate protection for domestic and international brand owners, in compliance with
the TRIPs agreement.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The Trademark is an intangible asset and its impact on the market is immense. Once
brand/Trademark becomes famous or well known it creates revenue to the trader. The
Trademark/Service mark can be assigned and licensed to the prospective user for good
consideration. The quality of the product and brand value plays vital role in the promotion of
 Page | 5

goods and the business. The valuation of the brand significantly creates the status to the trader
in the market. Not only the financial standing but it creates the social status in the market. In
the 3 recent past the value of the brand of APPLE (mobile phone) is stated as 100 billion dollars.
Any imitation or copying of the well-known trademarks by way of passing off and infringement
results in costly litigation. A well-chosen and well publicized trademark often has value far
beyond the physical assets of a company

1. TRADEMARK PROTECTION- A CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS

Trademark law is concerned with preventing confusion among consumers and protecting
people’s investments in their source-indicating marks. Honest sellers spend millions to create
brand identity and do not want buyers to confuse their products with others’ products. Nor do
they want other sellers to use similar marks that dilute their name recognition. Prudent buyers
do not want to be confused about which producer is the source of a product and rely on a
mark to indicate what characteristics and quality the product has.1

1.1. DEFINITION OF TRADEMARK AND ITS VARIATIONS

1.1.1. European Union and United Kingdom

The Trademarks Act 1994 of the United Kingdom and the corresponding legislation in the
other 24-member states of the European Union, are in large part designed to implement the
European Trademarks Directive, and legislation has to be understood in the light of that
Directive. Although entitled “The First Council Directive to Approximate the Laws of the
Member States Relating to Trademarks”2, it is by no means merely a first step in the
harmonization of the trademark law; on the contrary it provides rather complete
harmonization of the laws of the member states on several of the primary features of the
trademark law. Thus, it lays down, among other things, the essential provisions governing the
nature of trademark; the grounds for refusal of invalidity; the rights conferred by a trademark;
and the conditions governing the exhaustion of rights.

1.1.2. European Law

Article 2 of the TM Directive entitled as “Signs of which Trademark may consist” provides
that
“A trademark may consist of any sign capable of being represented graphically, particularly
words, including personal names, designs, letters, numerals, the shape of goods or of their
packaging, provided that such signs are capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one
undertaking from those of other undertakings.
 Page | 6

1.1.3. United Kingdom

When UK legislature implemented the TM Directive into UK law it incorrectly thought that
the directive defined “trademark”. In fact, the attributes of a ‘trademark’ have to be gathered
from various sources, some explicit and some implicit. Article 2 of the TM Directive was
implemented by the United Kingdom in S.1 of the 1994 Act as

1.1.4. United States of America

The term “trademark” includes any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination
thereof—
(1) Used by a person, or
(2) which a person has a bona fide intention to use in commerce and applies to register on the
principal register established by this chapter, to identify and distinguish his or her goods,
including a unique product, from those manufactured or sold by others and to indicate the
source of the goods, even if that source is unknown.
4.1.5. India
While some form of proprietary protection for marks in India dates back several millennia,
India’s statutory Trademarks Law dates back to 1860. Prior to 1940 there was no official
trademark Law in India. The principles of infringement actions had already been embodied in
S.54 of the Specific Relief Act of 1877 but it is interesting to note that there does not appear a
single reported case in India in which S.54 of the Specific relief act has been relied upon. The
reason for this may be that infringement actions in the United Kingdom after 1875 being
based on registered trademarks were not followed in India probably under the erroneous
impression that without registration of a trademark that cause of action was not available. But
the Supreme Court has affirmed the decision of the Bombay High Court that a trademark has
been considered as a property and an infringement action was known to India.
4.1.6. .BASIC PRINCIPLES OF TRADEMARK LAW
It is interesting to note that the law of trademark, practically all over the world is based on
three broad concepts. They are distinctiveness or distinctive character, deceptive similarity or
near resemblance of marks, same description or similarity of goods. The purpose of the Act,
as stated in the preamble, is to provide for registration and better protection of trademarks for
goods and services and to prevent the use of fraudulent marks. In consonance with this object
certain fundamental principles of trademark law can be extracted from the Trademarks Act
1999. Besides these principles, the principles laid down by Gita Mittal J of Delhi High Court
in Pfizer Products Inc v. Neeraj Food Products are also enumerated below:

● Since registration confers on the proprietor a kind of monopoly right over the use of the
mark, which may consist of a word or a symbol legitimately required by other traders
for bonafide trading or business purposes, certain restrictions are necessary on the class
of words over which such monopoly right may be granted.
 Page | 7

● Registration should not interfere with the bonafide use by other persons of names or
words in ordinary usage.
● Property rights in a trademark acquired by use are superior to similar rights obtained
by registration under the act. This is clear from the preamble which refers to “better
protection of trademarks thereby necessarily implying the existence and availability of
some protection under the Common law. It, therefore follows that prior users of
trademarks should be protected against any monopoly rights granted under the statute.
● There are obviously two main interests to be protected when a mark is presented for
registration. There is the first interest of the public. A trademark ought not to be
registered if its use will be apt to mislead the public as to the origin of the goods they
are purchasing. They are also the interests of the other existing traders who are entitled
to object if the use of the trademark proposed for registration will be calculated to
enable the applicant’s goods to be passed off on the public as such other trader’s goods.
● It may so happen that the trader has honestly used the trademark for a number of years
although an identical mark has been registered or used by another. Section 12 of the act
provides for registration of such marks subject to certain limitations and suitable
conditions.
● A trademark has no meaning unless it is used in relation to some goods. Broadly
speaking, the life of a trademark depends upon its use and continued non-use may lead
to its eventual death. There is therefore no equitable or logical basis for the continuance
of protection afforded by registration where the mark is no longer in use for sufficiently
long period.
● A trademark is recognized as a property. The term ‘proprietor of a trademark’ is used
in the definition of a trademark and also in various other provisions of the act. It should
therefore be assignable and transmissible as in the case of other forms of property.
● Having regard to the peculiar nature of this property, the act has taken care to impose
● Various restrictions and conditions for the assignment and transmission of property
rights in a trademark, whether registered or unregistered.
● Granting the benefits of registration under the Statute is not only a matter of interest to
the applicant seeking registration, but it is a matter in which the public is also interested.
It is, therefore, necessary that any number of public who wants to object to object to the
registration should be permitted to do so. The act accordingly provides for
advertisement of the application and opposition thereto by any interested party.

Development across globe due to liberalization and globalization

4.2. NEED FOR UNIFORMITY
The ever-increasing importance and proliferation of trademarks in international and domestic
commerce is remarkable in its own way and should not be overshadowed by the current
discussions concerning patents and copyrights. Most obvious is the impact of electronic
commerce and the growth of the Internet as a selling medium, a forum that transcends national
boundaries and bears no physical location on “Main Street.” The reputation of a product or
service travels rapidly in today’s commercial marketplace, and can reach foreign markets long
Before the trademark owner has actually begun marketing its products and conducting business.
Trademarks have become even more fundamental in our commercial lives due to the primary
changes taking place in the intensely competitive international markets in consumer goods. When
compared to the market that existed a few decades ago, today’s consumer demands variety)
quality, and constant novelty. To meet these demands, businesses tailor their products to smaller
and increasingly heterogeneous, niche markets. Consequently, the incentive exists to search for
 Page | 8

the least expensive location to manufacture the product that will enable the business to compete
in global markets. In this fluid environment, the trademark originator’s intent to expand beyond
its original market should be presumed.

4.3. INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS RELATING TO TRADEMARK LAWS

5.2.a. Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property- The Beginnings of the
International Trademark System. The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property
is the principal international treaty governing patents, trademarks, and unfair competition.
Concluded in 1883, the Paris Convention resulted in the first international effort to standardize
and simplify the protection of intellectual property rights in Member States. This Treaty has
been subsequently amended several times, the last amendment occur ring in Stockholm in
1967. Significantly, the Treaty drafted at the Paris Convention has the greatest number of
Member States of any treaty dealing with intellectual property rights, and is administered by
WIPO. The Paris Convention is primarily concerned with harmonization of Substantive
trademark law and is premised on the fundamental principle that Member States are not
allowed to discriminate between their nationals and nationals of other Member States. Thus,
nationals of Member States enjoy the same rights, advantages, and protections as nationals in
every other Member State of the Paris Convention. The consistency in trademark law among
Member States is accomplished by the provisions of the Paris Convention that provide for
conditions associated with the filing and registration of trademarks which are determined by
national laws.

5.2.b. TRIPS Agreement :-

5.2.b.(i). WTO and The TRIPS Agreement The conclusion of the Agreement on Trade related
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) in 1994 presaged the advent of a global epoch
in trademark rights. The TRIPS Agreement not only provides substantive standards for the
eligibility and protection of trademarks, but also mandates that “effective” enforcement
procedures are available under national legal systems. It does so by establishing a global
network of “coordinate” national courts to enforce the substantive trademark provisions of the
Agreement. Without replacing the national, territorially-based trademarks of Member States,
TRIPS is based on principles of territoriality requiring independent trademark applications and
actions for the enforcement of rights in each Member State of the World
Trade Organization (WTO).

Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is expected to have the greatest
impact on the pharmaceutical sector and access to medicines. The TRIPS Agreement has been
in force since 1995 and is to date the most comprehensive multilateral agreement on intellectual
property. The TRIPS Agreement introduced global minimum standards for protecting and
enforcing nearly all forms of intellectual property rights (IPR), including those for patents.
International conventions prior to TRIPS did not specify minimum standards for patents. At
the time that negotiations began, over 40 countries in the world did not grant patent protection
for pharmaceutical products. The TRIPS Agreement now requires all WTO members, with few
exceptions, to adapt their laws to the minimum standards of IPR protection. In addition, the
TRIPS Agreement also introduced detailed obligations for the enforcement of intellectual
property rights. However, TRIPS also contains provisions that allow a degree of flexibility and
 Page | 9

sufficient room for countries to accommodate their own patent and intellectual property
systems and developmental needs. This means countries have
a certain amount of freedom in modifying their regulations and, various options exist for them
in formulating their national legislation to ensure a proper balance between the goal of
providing incentives for future inventions of new drugs and the goal of affordable access to
existing medicines.

Effects of an International Registration:

The effects of an international registration in each designated Contracting Party are, from the
date of the international registration, the same as if the mark had been deposited directly with
the office of that Contracting Party. If no refusal is issued within the applicable time limit, or
if a refusal originally notified by a Contracting Party is subsequently withdrawn, the protection
of the mark is, from the date of the international registration, the same as if it had been
registered by the office of that Contracting Party. An international registration is effective for
10 years. It may be renewed for further periods of 10 years on payment of the prescribed fees.
Protection maybe limited with regard to some or all of the goods or services or may be
renounced with regard to only some of the designated Contracting Parties. An international
registration may be transferred in relation to all or some of the designated
Contracting Parties and all or some of the goods or services indicated.

5.2.c. Madrid Protocol – Indian case

India submitted its instrument of accession to the Protocol relating to the Madrid Agreement
Concerning the International Registration of Marks, known as the “Madrid Protocol” on 8 April
2013 with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). India became the 90th country
to accede to the Madrid Protocol. This is one of the most important developments in Indian
trademark law in recent years, providing a system for obtaining international trademark
protection that is streamlined and potentially very cost-efficient. The Madrid Protocol’s
efficient trademark protection shall be made available in India to international and domestic
trademark owners on 8 July, the date on which the treaty will enter into force with respect to
India.

PROTECTION OF TRADEMARKS UNDER TRIPS AGREEMENT

The basic rule contained in Article 15 is that any sign, or any combination of signs, capable
of distinguishing the goods and services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings,
must be eligible for registration as a trademark, provided that it is visually perceptible. Such
signs, in particular words including personal names, letters, numerals, figurative elements and
combinations of colours as well as any combination of such signs, must be eligible for
registration as trademarks.
Where signs are not inherently capable of distinguishing the relevant goods or services,
Member countries are allowed to require, as an additional condition for eligibility for
registration as a trademark, that distinctiveness has been acquired through use. Members are
free to determine whether to allow the registration of signs that are not visually perceptible
(e.g. sound or smell marks).
 Page | 10

Members may make registrability depend on use. However, actual use of a trademark shall
not be permitted as a condition for filing an application for registration, and at least three
years must have passed after that filing date before failure to realize an intent to use is
allowed as the ground for refusing the application (Article 14.3).
The Agreement requires service marks to be protected in the same way as marks
distinguishing goods (see e.g. Articles 15.1, 16.2 and 62.3).
The owner of a registered trademark must be granted the exclusive right to prevent all third
parties not having the owner's consent from using in the course of trade identical or similar
signs for goods or services which are identical or similar to those in respect of which the
trademark is registered where such use would result in a likelihood of confusion. In case of
the use of an identical sign for identical goods or services, a likelihood of confusion must be
presumed (Article 16.1).
The TRIPS Agreement contains certain provisions on well-known marks, which supplement
the protection required by Article 6bis of the Paris Convention, as incorporated by reference
into the TRIPS Agreement, which obliges Members to refuse or to cancel the registration,
and to prohibit the use of a mark conflicting with a mark which is well known. First, the
provisions of that Article must be applied also to services. Second, it is required that
knowledge in the relevant sector of the public acquired not only as a result of the use of the
mark but also by other means, including as a result of its promotion, be taken into account.
Furthermore, the protection of registered well-known marks must extend to goods or services
which are not similar to those in respect of which the trademark has been registered, provided
that its use would indicate a connection between those goods or services and the owner of the
registered trademark, and the interests of the owner are likely to be damaged by such use
(Articles 16.2 and 3).
Members may provide limited exceptions to the rights conferred by a trademark, such as fair
use of descriptive terms, provided that such exceptions take account of the legitimate interests
of the owner of the trademark and of third parties (Article 17).
Initial registration, and each renewal of registration, of a trademark shall be for a term of no
less than seven years. The registration of a trademark shall be renewable indefinitely
(Article 18).
Cancellation of a mark on the grounds of non-use cannot take place before three years of
uninterrupted non-use has elapsed unless valid reasons based on the existence of obstacles to
such use are shown by the trademark owner. Circumstances arising independently of the will
of the owner of the trademark, such as import restrictions or other government restrictions,
shall be recognized as valid reasons of non-use. Use of a trademark by another person, when
subject to the control of its owner, must be recognized as use of the trademark for the purpose
of maintaining the registration (Article 19).
It is further required that use of the trademark in the course of trade shall not be unjustifiably
encumbered by special requirements, such as use with another trademark, use in a special
form, or use in a manner detrimental to its capability to distinguish the goods or services
(Article 20)

As we all know, in India prior to the Act of 1940 there was no statutory legislation relating to
trademarks and the protection of such was based on common law which was substantially the
same that was applied in England. The trademark Act 1940, introduced for the first time
 Page | 11

machinery for the registration and statutory protection of trademarks in India. This Act was in
force until 1958, and then it was replaced by the Trade and Merchandise Act 1958. And then
in the year 1999 the Act of 1958 was replaced by the Trademarks Act 1999 to comply
with the provisions of TRIPS Agreement. Trademarks which are applied to goods and Service
marks are applied to services are protectable in India apart from Certification marks, which
indicate that particular products or services meet the standards set by the certifier. Well known
marks are also granted protected in India, though most countries protect only trademarks and
service marks. India also recognizes trademark rights under the Common law. Such rights are
acquired, through use of a trademark in commerce and registration is not mandatory. Common
law rights extend to a geographic area, in which the trademark owner carries on his business
under his mark in relation to products or services to which the mark is applied. Priority of right
is determined by who first used the mark within a particular geographic area. In countries, like
India, which recognize common law rights, use of a mark in commerce has to be proved before
registration of the mark can be granted. In those countries that do not recognize common law
trademark rights, such rights can be acquired only through registration.

PROTECTION ACCORDED TO CONVENTIONAL TRADEMARKS

a. Collective marks

The collective marks are also marks at the first instance and could be in the form of a device,
name, word or label. The purpose and nature of collective marks is to distinguish the goods or
services of the members of an association of persons as against an individual juristic personality
as in the case of trade mark. The collective marks also indicate a connection in the course of
trade but such connection is not with a particular manufacturer but with an association of
persons of which such manufacturer is a member. The collective mark is not owned by any
individual manufacturer or member of the association. It is collectively owned
and possessed by the association of persons, which could be in the form of an incorporated
company, a society registered under The Society’s Act. The partnership firms are not eligible98
to own collective marks under most of the legislations in the World. The association of persons,
who own collective marks may compose of the manufacturers, traders, producers or
professional bodies like Institute of Chartered Accountants, Patent Agents, Trade Mark Agents,
Board of Cricket Control or alike.

The function of Collective Marks is to distinguish and identify the goods or services of the
members of the association of persons which own such collective marks. The association of
persons generally adopt some device, name, or symbol and such devices, names or symbols
are used by the members to indicate their membership of such association to the members of
the trade, general public or all others connected with such goods or services offered by the
association. A person is entitled to the use of a collective mark so long as he continues to be a
member of the association of persons formed with the objective of providing minimum
standard of quality for being admitted as a member. No individual member of such association
can claim an exclusive right to the use or exploitation thereof to the exclusion of other members
of the association.

.2. Well known trademarks

The term ‘well known’ in relation to trademarks originates from the term ‘reputation’ which
was recognized for the first time in the age-old case of JG v Stanford wherein it was held that
 Page | 12

the law of passing off prevents commercial dishonesty on the part of traders. The essence of
passing off has retained its classic form till date. The very basis of the said action is existence
of goodwill or reputation attached to the particular goods and the degree of representation that
is likely to deceive the public. In the absence of a statutory definition, acquisition of reputation
depends upon the usage of a particular good or service in connection with business.
However, a plaintiff’s reputation does not have to extend throughout the country and may be
restricted to a particular locality where the business is conducted. In India, protection to well-
known trademarks is given more importance as compared to ordinary trademarks. Formerly,
this protection was given by way of common law formulations like passing off. For example,
in Daimler Benz Akietge sellschaft v Hybo Hindustan, the manufacturers of Mercedes Benz
sought an injunction against the defendants who were using the famous ‘three pointed star in
the circle’ and the word ‘Benz’. The Court granted injunction against the defendants who were
using these marks for selling apparel. Similarly, in Whirlpool Co &Anr v N R Dongre, the
plaintiff, Whirlpool had not subsequently registered their trademark after the registration of the
same in 1977. At the relevant time, the plaintiff had a worldwide reputation and used to sell
their machines in the US embassy in India and also advertised in a number of international
magazines having circulation in India. However, the defendant started using the mark on its
washing machines. After an action was brought against them, the Court held that the plaintiff
had an established ‘trans border reputation’ in India and hence the defendants were injected
from using the same for their products. Later, the Trademarks Act of 1999 (TM Act) brought
about several statutory changes, e.g., protection of well-known trademarks even without
registration or use in India apart from making some changes to harmonize it with the
obligations under the TRIPS Agreement. The Act also allowed the proprietors of well-known
trademarks a ground to oppose at the stage of registration itself, thereby giving special
treatment and rights for such marks.
 Page | 13

Conclusion
Trademarks are distinctive signs used to distinguish the goods and services of one business
from those of another business . In most domestic systems, most legal protections for
trademarks depend on the trademark holder registering the trademark with the relevant
authorities.
TRIPS aims to harmonise some aspects of trademark law across countries, and as such contains
obligations to:
 provide for the registration of trademarks on a non-discriminatory basis (although a
WTO member may decline to register offensive or misleading trademarks) – contained
in article 15
 provide trademark owners with rights to prevent third parties from using their
trademarks – contained in article 16
Notably, TRIPS does not include an obligation to allow the trademark to be used (e.g. by being
displayed in marketing/advertising), or grant the trademark holder rights to prevent the State
from regulating the use of a trademark (e.g. by restricting such marketing/advertising).
Trademarks are what are known as negative rights – rights to prevent third parties from doing
something. They are not positive rights that grant the trademark owner the right to do
something themselves. They can be asserted only against other private actors, and not against
the state. That trademarks are negative rights has been recognised in the Australia – Plain
Packaging WTO decision (panel report at 7.1978), by other WTO panels (EC – Geographical
Indications, at para 7.610-7.611 of the US panel report and para 7.610-7.611 of the Australia
panel report, by the investment tribunal in Philip Morris v. Uruguay, and by domestic courts in
the United Kingdom, France, Australia, and Uganda.
This means that provided they are implemented by restricting use rather than registration and
do not affect the rights of tobacco companies to prevent competitors from using their marks,
WHO FCTC-implementing measures are unlikely to fall within the scope of TRIPS’
protections for trademark registration or the rights of trademark holders.
 Page | 14

Bibliography

 trademarks and symbols;Vasaburo Kawayama,

volume -2:-symbolic designs
 trademark legal care; 6th edition , Nolo publication
 www.wto.org
 PROTECTION OF TRADEMARK AND GEOGRAPHIC
INDICATIONS Panel Report, WT/DS290/R, 15 March 2005