CAN A COMPANY OR PERSON CLAIM TO HAVE A COPYRIGHT FOR A COLOR PATTERN OR SHADE?

Lalbee S
Aug 20, 2023
5 min read

Written by S. Lalbee, Law Student

According to Section 10 of the Trade Marks Act, a trademark may be restricted to a certain color or color combinations. A mark may be registered if it is well-known and the color is important to the business. According to Section 10 of the Trademarks Acts, a mark may be registered if consumers can identify it by that color and if its value is zero without it.[1]

Protection From Copyright Infringement and Registration of a Proper Trademark:

Color is intrinsically undistinguishable under trademark law; however, a color combination that has gained enough significance might become distinctive and qualify for trademark registration and copyright infringement. Only when it can be proven that a color combination is so intimately linked to a product or brand that the product or brand can be recognized by the specific color combination alone will the combination of colors be deemed unique.[2]
Utilizing a distinctive color scheme makes it easier for clients or the general public to identify the source of a product, which expands the market for that source and prevents competitors from profiting from this distinguishing brand. When applying for a color trademark to be protected from copyright infringement, the applicant must provide proof that the claimed color combination or specific color is uniquely connected with the applicant and that the general public connects the color with the products listed in the application. Public opinion polls that show a connection between the color combination and the applicant's brand or product might serve as proof.

Distinctive Character and Registration of a Color Pattern:

When applying for registration of a color combination, it should be noted that this is the mark's distinguishing characteristic.[3] However, if a specific color is claimed, the applicant must provide proof that the claimed color combination or color is only used to identify their goods or is entirely linked with them. It may be difficult to claim distinction over a color if it is widely used in trade. For instance, the color red as a trademark for a beverage could be unique, but when the color red is claimed for the packaging of those bottles, it wouldn't be.

Uniqueness of Color Pattern or Shade Matters:

Color and brands are related because it provides a distinctive way for people to understand the message. It encourages customers to remember the business by its color as colors are simple to recall. One should employ color in their logo to help people remember it. When it comes to branding and marketing, color does important.

Based on the purpose that colors serve in society, companies have trademarked certain colors. Even courts have acknowledged that particular colors can only be trademarked if they have a specific use. Conor is important to businesses, and if their rivals try to replicate it, it can be legally prevented.[4]

Copyrightability of Color Pattern or Shade:

The objective of copyright is to encourage beneficial arts and science while fostering creativity and innovation. A person would have a monopoly on a color if they owned the copyright to it. This would discourage artists from trying new things or experimenting with color in their paintings. The reasons why the idea of color was not specifically included in the scope of copyright law may also be supported by copyright concepts like the public domain and the sceneries a faire doctrine. Therefore, it makes more sense to copyright the complete piece rather than just one color. While colors are not frequently given protection under copyright law, colors may have a greater chance of doing so under trademark law since it is simpler to meet the standards and requirements of a color mark and the goals of trademark law. However, rather than artists trademarking a color based on their artwork, this usually works better with companies and well-known marks.[5]

Indian Law and Perspective of Judiciary:

In the case of Colgate Palmolive Company v. Anchor Health & Beauty,[6] the court ruled that a customer's overall perception of the source and origin of the goods comes from the visual impression created by the color scheme, container form, packaging, etc. It constitutes to passing off if illiterate, ignorant, and naïve clients get perplexed about the source and origin of the items they have been using for a long time by purchasing the goods in a container with a specific form, color scheme, and attire. The Indian judiciary recognized color as a component of trade dress in the aforementioned case, and it offered protection to it in the current case by enjoining Anchor from using the color combination of red and white in that order as trade dress on the container and packing.

According to the definition of a mark under the Trademarks Act, which requires a mark to be a "combination of color's," the Delhi High Court refused to register the trademark of red colour on the sole of heeled shoes in one of its recent decisions, in the case of Christian Louboutin v. Abu Baker.[7]

In the packaging for their milk chocolates, Cadbury demonstrated that its characteristic shade of purple had taken on a particular personality. This claim was supported by a public poll, which was approved on October 1, 2012, following a protracted legal dispute with Nestle in the famous case of Cadbury Uk Limited V. The Comptroller General of Patents Designs And Trademarks & Nestle S.A.[8]

Specially for Companies: Case Studies

DEERE & COMPANY'S trademark is a certain color. The jumping deer logo, company name, and yellow and green color scheme make up its trademark. This business sells power tools for the outdoors. All three of them belong to the corporation, which forbids any other manufacturer of similar gear from utilizing them alone or together. Any other manufacturer of machinery cannot use the colors yellow and green together.[9]
CATERPILLAR YELLOW: Without the company's permission, you may not use the distinctive Caterpillar Yellow. However, since yellow is a useful color for building roads, Cat cannot stop other manufacturers from producing machinery in that color.
TIFFANY & CO.: The color of the Blue Book cover was chosen by Charles Lewis Tiffany, the company's proprietor. Tiffany Blue was then utilized on everything, including advertisements for the corporation as well as jeweler boxes and shopping bags. Only specific patterns, forms, or purposes are eligible for color trademarks. The color is solely preserved for the bags, packaging, or advertisements from other jewelers, much like in the case of Tiffany. It's crucial to know that they only own that blue in circumstances when it may be mistaken for one of their items. "Robin's egg blue" is Tiffany's exclusive color for its boxes and bags. Anyone and anyone may utilize robin's egg blue. It is permissible for someone to paint their walls this color. Only in cases where there is a risk of brand misunderstanding from other jewelers, is this color for Tiffany protected.

References:

[1] ssrana.in/Ip-laws/ Trademarks-in-India/ Trademarks-act-India/ [2] Jeanne C. Fromer & Christopher Jon Sprigman, Copyright Law [3] Law relating to Intellectual Property Rights, LexisNexis student Edition, V.K. AHUJA. [4] Glynn S. Lunney Jr, Trademark Monopolies, 48 Emory L. J. 367 (1999). [5] copyright.gov.in/Documents/CopyrightRules1957 [6] Colgate Palmolive Company v. Anchor Health & Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd. 2003 (27) PTC 478 Del [7] Christian Louboutin v. Abu Baker CS (COMM) No.890/2018 [8] Cadbury Uk Limited V. The Comptroller General Of Patents Designs And Trademarks & Nestle S.A. (Case No: A3/2016/3082), [9] Deere & Co. & Anr vs. Mr. Malkit Singh & Ors. (CS (COMM) No. 738/2018)