+

Delhi High Court To Decide: Whether Google’s Warning On Downloading APK File Constitutes Disparagement Of Winzo’s Trademark And Goodwill?

The Delhi High Court in the case Winzo Games private Limited v. Google LLC and Ors observed and is set to decide as to whether the display of warning by Google to users before they download WinZo’s APK file on Chrome mobile browser constitutes disparagement of digital gaming platform’s trademarks, goodwill, reputation, and business. The […]

The Delhi High Court in the case Winzo Games private Limited v. Google LLC and Ors observed and is set to decide as to whether the display of warning by Google to users before they download WinZo’s APK file on Chrome mobile browser constitutes disparagement of digital gaming platform’s trademarks, goodwill, reputation, and business.
The court observed that the warning displayed by the Google is, ‘this type of file may harm your device and do you want to keep WinZO.apk anyway?
The bench headed by Justice C Hari Shankar in the case observed and will also decide as to whether the use of filing name in the warning amounts to use as a trademark under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
In the present case, the suit was filed by WinZo last year against Google seeking protection of its trademarks ‘WinZo’ and ‘WinZo Games’.
It being the case of WinZo’s that the Google’s warning amounts to infringement of its trademarks and it disparages the digital gaming services under the ‘WinZO’ or ‘WinZO Games’ marks.
On the other hand, the Google has taken the stand that several other browsers display such warning while downloading third-party APK format files or applications and therefore, it constitutes an industry practice.
The bench headed by Justice Shankar in the case observed and has directed both WinZo and Google to place on record a joint schedule for recording of evidence.
The court in the case observed and has also framed the following issues:
Whether the display of Warning by Defendant amounts to inducement to the breach of contract?
Whether the display of Warning by Defendant comes within the ambit of Section 30 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999?
Whether the display of Warning by Defendant is being justified in view of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and its accompanying Rules or any other applicable laws in India?
Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to reliefs as sought in the Prayer of the captioned suit?
Whether the Plaintiff is being disentitled to reliefs on account of delay, latches and material suppression?
The Co-ordinate Bench in the case observed and has refused to grant interim relief to WinZo wherein stating that the warning displayed by Google is in the nature of disclaimer to caution and does not result in trademark infringement of gaming platform.
The court in the case observed that the reference to the name of the APK file or application ‘WinZO’ in Google’s disclaimer is only for identifying the file being downloaded for purpose of warning.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case observed and has dismissed the interim application, thus, the court remarked that since Google was not advertising goods or services by using WinZo’s marks, no case for infringement of trademark was made out.
Accordingly, the court listed the matter for further consideration on February 20, 2024.

Tags: