In 2024, the Delhi High Court held that the use of the PUMA mark within the drop-down menu on Indiamart’s platform constitutes use as a trade mark. The Court observed that such use guides buyers and sellers to the brand, and by engaging in this activity, Indiamart was acting beyond the scope of a mere intermediary. Thus, it was disentitled from claiming safe harbour protection under the Information Technology Act. The Court observed that providing an option to sellers to describe their products by a brand name does amount to dishonest business conduct, nor did it establish that Indiamart was encouraging unauthorized use of trademarks. Thus, Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act was not applicable in this context. Further, the Court held that Indiamart qualifies as an intermediary, and it has met the conditions for safe harbour. Moreover, there was insufficient material to prove that the platform had conspired, abetted, or aided trademark infringement. Though the Division Bench set aside the previous order, they  directed Indiamart to promptly take down infringing listings upon notice and ensure due diligence mechanisms are followed.

Source: Indiamart Intermesh Ltd. v. Puma Se [FAO(OS) (COMM) 6/2024]