Fashion Battle in the Digital Arena – Abhi Traders vs. Fashnear Technologies

In the Delhi High Court, there is an ongoing dispute involving Abhi Traders, the Plaintiff, and Fashnear Technologies Private Limited & Others, the Defendants. The Plaintiff alleges Copyright infringement, passing off, and other reliefs including damages against the Defendants for unlawfully replicating and selling garments identical to the Plaintiff’s products on the e-commerce platform ‘www.meesho.com.’

Facts

The Plaintiff, Abhi Traders, is a retailer of clothing items for men and women selling it under the Mark “IBRANA.”  They also specialize in ethnic wear, which is designed by their own in-house designers. Defendants No. 2-10 are accused of advertising, publishing, and offering for sale garments that imitate the Plaintiff’s garments and misusing copyrighted photographs and images.

Issues

The key issue in contention involves Copyright infringement, passing off, and the Defendants’ alleged misuse of the Plaintiff’s intellectual property, causing financial harm and consumer confusion.

Arguments Advanced

Plaintiff

1. Abhi Traders contend that Defendants No. 2-10 have engaged in blatant Copyright infringement by replicating their clothing designs and using identical photographs for marketing purposes. The Plaintiff emphasizes that the unauthorized use of Copyrighted images misleads consumers, creating a deceptive semblance of equivalence between the genuine products and the imitations.
2. They assert that the deliberate pricing of Defendants No. 2-10’s goods lower, despite inferior quality, inflicts financial harm on the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff argues that the similar external appearance of the imitated products creates confusion among consumers, impacting the Plaintiff’s market performance.
3. The Plaintiff asserts that Defendant No. 1 is aiding and abetting the infringement by not providing complete details of the sellers on its platform, as required by consumer protection rules. They contend that the lack of transparency on Defendant No. 1’s platform implicates it in the infringing activities of Defendants No. 2-10.

Defendants

1. Defendant No. 1 argues that as an intermediary, the platform’s responsibilities are restricted to removing URLs of look-alike images and products upon Court orders. They assert a readiness to comply with any Court-issued takedown orders during the proceedings, indicating a commitment to adhere to legal requirements for intermediaries.
2. The defense contends that Defendant No. 1 is under an obligation for intermediaries and is willing to take necessary actions upon Court orders to remove infringing content from its platform. They emphasize the platform’s commitment to ensuring that its operations align with the relevant statutes governing e-commerce platforms.

Court’s Analysis and Conclusion

The Court, after considering submissions and comparative evidence, finds a prima facie case of Copyright infringement. It acknowledges the Plaintiff’s claim of irreparable harm and consumer confusion due to the Dfendant’s actions. The Court grants an ex-parte ad interim injunction, restraining:

• Defendants No. 2-9 from reproducing, copying, publishing or imitating any designs of the Plaintiff’s clothing and also extends to the prohibition against reproducing any images related to the Plaintiff’s products, including photographs.
• The Defendants also restrained from duplicating any of the Plaintiff’s designs as well as any other designs/images belonging to the Plaintiff concerning its clothing line.

Orders and Directions

The Court issues specific directions, including revealing seller details, taking down infringing listings, and enhancing transparency on the e-commerce platform. The Defendants are given the opportunity to file replies and seek modifications within specified timelines. The next hearing date is 1^st August, 2024.