Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
|dc.description.abstract||Comparative advertising by means of using another’s trademark is permissible, however while doing so the advertiser cannot disparage the goods or services of another. Any such act disparaging the goods or services of another shall not only be an act constituting infringement of the trademark, but shall also be an act constituting product disparagement. This paper analyses the trite law on comparative advertising and product disparagement, in relation to trademark law; in the light of Sections 29(8) and 30(1), of The Trademarks Act, 1999. Section 29(8) enunciates situations, where use of another’s mark in advertising can amount to infringement, if such use does not comply with the conditions laid down under the section. At the same time, Section 30(1) makes such use, an exception, if it is in accordance with the conditions provided under this section. The conditions given under these two legal provisions are identical. The intent of the legislature in enacting the aforementioned provisions is quite apparent: To impose the leniencies of permitted comparative advertising over the stringencies of trademark protection.||en_US|
|dc.source||JIPR Vol.11(6) [November 2006]||en_US|
|dc.title||Comparative Advertising and Product Disparagement vis-à-vis Trademark Law||en_US|
|Appears in Collections:||JIPR Vol.11(6) [November 2006]|
Items in NOPR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.