Whatsapp

" TRADE MARKS: DISTINCTIVENESS: LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENT & JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION TRADE MARKS: DISTINCTIVENESS: LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENT & JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION   INTERPRETATIONS OF DISTINCTIVENESS: GROUNDS FOR RECTIFICATION OF REGIST'ER   By   Mr. Justice Dr. Nasim Hasan Shah, Judge Supreme Court of Pakistan   What's is a name : That which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet (Romeo and Julliet ; II. 2) ‑--Shakespeare   But this is not true of Trade Marks and ill the world of commerce, as opposed to the world of the poet, the name is everything. It distinguishes one article from another. It provides the distinction of the goods of one owner from the similar goods of another. In this competitive world 'of commerce, one's "rose;" should smell more sweetly and sell more swiftly than the rose of others. For this purpose, the owner of the "rose" must not only get his rose identified by his name and lead the world to think that his rose smells more sweetly than the rose of any other but also ensure that no one passes off his similar goods as his "rose".   The fundamental rule in trade‑marks, in the language of Lord Langdale all the case of Perry v. Truefitt is that one man has no right to put off iris goods for sale as the goods of a rival trader, and he cannot, therefore, be allowed to use names, marks, letters or other indicia, by which he tray induce purchasers to believe that the goods which he is selling are the manufacture of another man. A man may mark his own manufacture, either by his name, or by using for the purpose of any symbol or emblem, however unmeaning in itself, and if such symbol or emblem comes by use to be recognised in trade as the mark of the goods of a…