Page 39 - CineBuster Vol-3 Issue-04
P. 39

HigH Court order : StopS Balaji WaferS


              from Selling WaferS tHat are an ‘oBviouS


                           imitation’ of frito-lay’S CHipS



                      he Bombay High Court
                      has  injuncted  Indian
                      company  Balaji  Wafers
                      Pvt  Ltd  from  selling
                      potato   wafers   that
           Tare  similar  to  those
                      manufactured  by  Frito-
           Lay  North  America,  calling  them  an
           “obvious  imitation”  of  the  American
           chips.

           Frito-Lay, along with its Indian partners/
           distributors,  had  approached  the  HC
           against Balaji on the uniqueness of the
           design of its potato wafers sold under
           the  name  Lay’s  Maxx  Chips/Ruffles.           unique design, which has deeper ridges and crusts throughout
           Balaji sold its product under the name Rumbles.
                                                            the surface. Through senior advocate Veerendra Tulzapurkar
                                                            and advocate Hiren Kamod, it said this peculiar design made
           According Frito-Lay, it had invented the wave-like design of   the chips crunchier.
           its wafers and had it registered in 2012. After Lay’s popularity
           grew,  it  claimed  to  have  developed  another  innovative  and
                                                            Balaji said in its defence that the designs were not unique to
                                                            Frito-Lay. Contending that it had made minor changes to the
                                                            existing designs, it said Frito-Lay’s registration of the designs
                                                            deserve to be cancelled.

                                                            Justice SC Gupte said that although this contention might be
                                                            right, the onus to satisfy the court on that point was on Balaji
                                                            itself.  The  court  further  observed  that  at  this  stage,  when
                                                            the parties were yet to present detailed evidence about their
                                                            respective contentions, the court was supposed to rely on
                                                            visual evidence. “What is important to note is that in assessing
                                                            the cases, one had to go by a general ocular impression; the
                                                            novelty or otherwise of the product had to be assessed with
                                                            eye as the ultimate arbiter,” it said.


                                                            The court said in some instances, geometrical changes to a
                                                            product don’t affect its quality or purpose, but in the case of
                                                            wafers, design changes could make all the difference to its
                                                            texture and, therefore, its quality. “The ridges and crusts in the
                                                            plaintiffs’ designs do have marked prominence and angularity
                                                            and, to the bare eye, seem to be distinct from the generally
                                                            wavy pattern of chips otherwise available in the market





                                          35   CINE BUSTER  n  MARCH 15  n  2020
   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44