Delhi High Court rejects reprieve to Snapdeal

Delhi High Court rejects reprieve to Snapdeal

The e-commerce company had earlier been provided succor several times    

The Delhi High Court has refused to grant succor to e-commerce platform Snapdeal that sought an injunction against domain name registrars (DNRs) from offering any domain names with its trademark. The court was dealing with a suit and interim relief application filed by Snapdeal against a bunch of DNRs that provide domain names for parties seeking to register their websites.

Ruling on the matter, Justice C Hari Shankar said that the court could not pass an order restricting the defendants to register any domain name that included 'Snapdeal'.

The judge stated, "The plaintiff has to necessarily petition the court against each domain name that it finds to be infringing. This may be a long and cumbersome exercise. It cannot be helped. There is no shortcut to justice."

The plaintiff argued that various third parties having no connection with it were registering the name 'Snapdeal' and infringing their trademark under the Trade Marks Act. Snapdeal said it had approached the court in the past also and was granted relief. But the mushrooming websites continued to complicate matters.

However, the court noted, "It is not permissible for the court to hold, in advance, that every prospective alternative domain name, containing the word/thread/string 'Snapdeal' meant infringing in nature and, thereby, injunct, in an omnibus and global fashion, DNRs from ever providing any domain name. This would be completely impermissible."

It suggested the plaintiff approach the court, as in the past, against every domain name that is perceived to be infringing its registered marks.

"The court would then examine whether such a mark is infringing and injunct the use of such a domain name. The cause of action, in any trademark infringement suit, has to be with respect to the particular infringing trademark/trademarks," it said.

The bench ordered, "To avoid such liability, the DNRs would either have to modulate their algorithms to prospective registrants, potentially infringing alternatives, or avoid providing alternative domain names altogether. A situation that leaves the proprietors of the infringed trademarks to repeatedly knock at the doors of the court cannot be allowed to continue."