{"id":246263,"date":"2021-03-30T11:19:18","date_gmt":"2021-03-30T05:49:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=246263"},"modified":"2021-07-01T16:01:11","modified_gmt":"2021-07-01T10:31:11","slug":"big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/","title":{"rendered":"Big Basket and Daily Basket in trade mark row: Bullying, consumer confusion or justified?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>I. Background<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Recently, India\u2019s largest online grocery portal BigBasket served a &#8220;cease and desist&#8221; notice to a Coimbatore-based online grocery delivery startup Daily Basket<a href=\"#_ftn1\" name=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a>, alleging trade mark infringement and brand name violation over the use of the term &#8220;basket&#8221;. The said notice dated 17-2-2021<a href=\"#_ftn2\" name=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a> (the original notice bears a wrong date 17-2-2020) sent by BigBasket lawyers claims that Daily Basket infringes on its trade mark and brand and in turn alleged that Daily Basket has adopted a name and a mark which is deceptively and\/or confusingly similar to BigBasket name and mark and is carrying out an e-commerce business that offers similar products and services through a similar domain name \u2014 <a href=\"http:\/\/BigBasket.com\/\">BigBasket.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">As per the legal notice, BigBasket had given the other entity 15 days to comply with the legal notice and to intimate BigBasket regarding the request within the next seven days. In addition, BigBasket had also asked the e-commerce company to shell out Rs 2 lakh towards the cost of the legal notice. The notice from BigBasket comes at a time when Tata Group is in talks with the grocery unicorn for a 68% stake for $1.3 billion<a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>II. Cease and desist<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A cease and desist letter is a cautionary letter sent to an alleged wrongdoer describing the alleged misconduct and demanding that the alleged misconduct be stopped. A cease and desist letter provides notice that legal action may and will be taken if the conduct in question continues. Such letters are usually written by attorneys and are often sent to stop alleged or actual infringement of intellectual property rights, such as copyrights, trade marks, and patents.<a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">After setting forth the background, I shall throw some light upon the various contentions made on behalf of BigBasket as part of their &#8220;cease and desist&#8221; letter. They are enlisted below:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>Offering identical products and services through the conflicting similar domain name &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/dailybasket.com\/\">dailybasket.com<\/a>&#8220;.<\/li>\n<li>Unauthorised and violative use and dishonest adoption of a deceptively and\/or confusingly similar name and mark \u201cdailybasket\u201d and related logo.<\/li>\n<li>Mere mention or reference of a name containing \u201cbasket\u201d in word or logo form for any e-commerce business and related products conjure in the minds of relevant class of consumers and members of trade as that of being associated with our client.<\/li>\n<li>Deliberately copying the layout and get-up of the website <a href=\"http:\/\/BigBasket.com\/\">BigBasket.com<\/a>.<\/li>\n<li>Creation of a similar mobile application for offering services with mala fide intention.<\/li>\n<li>Promotion and advertisement on social media websites referencing the mark dailybasket which is deceptively and\/or confusingly similar.<\/li>\n<li>Prior adopter and user of the brand name BigBasket\/<a href=\"http:\/\/bigbasket.com\/\">bigbasket.com<\/a> in relation to the online sale of all kinds of household products including organic food, fruits, vegetables and other grocery items, meat, dairy products, bakery products, personal care and grooming products, farming and gardening products, kitchenware and appliances and pet products.<\/li>\n<li>Violating and diluting trade mark rights in its trade dress, trade name and mark BigBasket\/<a href=\"http:\/\/bigbasket.com\/\">bigbasket.com<\/a> and thus, constituting trade mark infringement.<\/li>\n<li>Unauthorised acts are detrimental to the distinctive character and reputation.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In response to the said notice, Daily Basket made the feud with Big Basket public by launching a website, namely, &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/bbisabully.com\/\">https:\/\/bbisabully.com\/<\/a>&gt;, wherein it attempts to debunk their claims. The said website delineates a point-by-point rebuttal to BigBasket\u2019s cease and desist notice. Some of them are highlighted as below:<\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li><strong>Comparison of logos<\/strong>\u2014 Except the word &#8220;basket&#8221;, there are no similarities or trade mark violations in the brand logo. Colors are different, font is different, graphics is different and the name itself is different.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-246264 aligncenter\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Logo-Comparison-300x78.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"78\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Logo-Comparison-300x78.png 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Logo-Comparison-768x200.png 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Logo-Comparison-1536x400.png 1536w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Logo-Comparison-60x16.png 60w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Logo-Comparison.png 1958w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li><strong> Comparison of the websites<\/strong>\u2014 Overall get-up not copied; entirely different UI \u2014 user interface (graphical user interface).<\/li>\n<li><strong> Comparison of mobile application screen<\/strong>\u2014 Everything is different from features to functionality.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">However, in an attempt to resolve the issue amicably, BigBasket issued a clarification through a tweet dated 24-2-2021<a href=\"#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\">[5]<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>III. Definition of trade mark bullying<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) defined the amorphous term trade mark bullying or trade mark trolling as the vexatious practice of a \u201ctrade mark owner that uses its trade mark rights to harass and intimidate another business beyond what the law might be reasonably interpreted to allow&#8221;.\u00a0Mirroring the modus operandi exhibited by patent assertion entities and copyright bullies, several creative mark owners have adopted and modified this sue-to-settle paradigm and applied it in the trade mark context. In short, trade mark trolls\u2014businesses both large and small\u2014aggressively assert rights beyond the scope of trade mark protection afforded by the statutes through the issuance of threatening cease and desist letters.<a href=\"#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Section 142 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999<\/strong> \u2014 <strong>Groundless threats of legal proceedings<\/strong> (1) Where a person, by means of circulars, advertisements or otherwise, threatens a person with an action or proceeding for infringement of a trade mark which is registered, or alleged by the first mentioned person to be registered, or with some other like proceeding a person aggrieved may, whether the person making the threats is or is not the registered proprietor or the registered user of the trade mark, bring a suit against the first mentioned person and may obtain a declaration to the effect that the threats are unjustifiable, and an injunction against the continuance of the threats and may recover such damages (if any) as he has sustained, unless the first mentioned person satisfies the court that the trade mark is registered and that the acts in respect of which the proceedings were threatened, constitute, or, if done would constitute, an infringement of the trade mark.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In a case, namely, <em>Bata India Ltd. <\/em>v.<em> Vitaflex Mauch GmbH<\/em><a href=\"#_ftn7\" name=\"_ftnref7\">[7]<\/a>, the plaintiff had instituted a case against the defendant for restraining them from making baseless groundless threats of initiating legal proceedings. The main conundrum before the court was to deal with the issue that whether the legal notice sent by the defendant amounted to a legal threat and whether the plaintiff was entitled to an injunction and monetary compensation and damages. The Delhi High Court held that the legal notice amounted to threat and the same was unjustifiable, therefore, the defendants were ordered to restrain themselves from issuing any further baseless threats.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>IV. Spectrum of distinctiveness<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In United States trade mark law<a href=\"#_ftn8\" name=\"_ftnref8\">[8]<\/a>, <em>Abercrombie &amp; Fitch Co. <\/em>v.<em> Hunting World Inc.<\/em> 537 F.2d 4 (2nd Cir. 1976),<a href=\"#_ftn9\" name=\"_ftnref9\">[9]<\/a> established the spectrum of trade mark distinctiveness in the US, breaking trade marks into classes which are accorded differing degrees of protection. Courts often speak of marks falling along the following &#8220;spectrum of distinctiveness&#8221;<a href=\"#_ftn10\" name=\"_ftnref10\">[10]<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" wp-image-246262 aligncenter\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/SOD-262x300.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"329\" height=\"377\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/SOD-262x300.png 262w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/SOD-768x880.png 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/SOD-1341x1536.png 1341w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/SOD-52x60.png 52w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/SOD.png 1734w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 329px) 100vw, 329px\" \/><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>V. Law of the land<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li><strong> Consumer confusion<\/strong>: As per Section 29(2)(<em>c<\/em>)<a href=\"#_ftn11\" name=\"_ftnref11\">[11]<\/a> of the Trade Marks Act, a registered trade mark is considered to be infringed by a person who uses a mark which is likely to cause confusion on the part of the public, or which is likely to have an association with the registered trade mark. In <em>F. Hoffmann-La Roche &amp; Co. Ltd. <\/em>v.<em> Geoffrey Manners &amp; Co. (P) Ltd.<\/em><a href=\"#_ftn12\" name=\"_ftnref12\">[12]<\/a>, it was held as follows:<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It is also important that the marks must be compared as a whole. It is not right to take a portion of the word and say that because that portion of the word differs from the corresponding portion of the word in the other case there is no sufficient similarity to cause confusion. The true test is whether the totality of the proposed trade mark is such that it is likely to cause deception or confusion or mistake in the minds of the person accustomed to the existing trade mark.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Thus, in <em>Lavroma<\/em> case (<em>Tokalon Ltd.<\/em> v. <em>Davidson &amp; Co.<\/em><a href=\"#_ftn13\" name=\"_ftnref13\">[13]<\/a>) Lord Johnston said:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\">&#8230; we are not bound to scan the words as we would in a question of comparatioliterarum. It is not a matter for microscopic inspection, but to be taken from the general and even casual point of view of a customer walking into a shop.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong> VI. Deceptive similarity<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In <em>Cadila Health Care Ltd. <\/em>v.<em> Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd.<\/em><a href=\"#_ftn14\" name=\"_ftnref14\">[14]<\/a>, the Supreme Court observed that in an action for passing off on the basis of unregistered trade mark generally for deciding the question of deceptive similarity, the following factors are to be considered:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ol start=\"35\">\n<li>\u00a0<span style=\"color: #008000;\">&#8230; (<em>a<\/em>) the nature of the marks i.e. whether the marks are word marks or label marks or composite marks i.e. both words and label works;<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\">(<em>b<\/em>) the degree of [resemblance] between the marks, phonetically similar and hence similar in idea;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\">(<em>c<\/em>) the nature of the goods in respect of which they are used as trade marks;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\">(<em>d<\/em>) the similarity in the nature, character and performance of the goods of the rival traders;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\">(<em>e<\/em>) the class of purchasers who are likely to buy the goods bearing the marks they require, on their education and intelligence and a degree of care they are likely to exercise in purchasing and\/or using the goods;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\">(<em>f<\/em>) the mode of purchasing the goods or placing orders for the goods; and<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\">(<em>g<\/em>) any other surrounding circumstances which may be relevant in the extent of dissimilarity between the competing marks.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>VII. My take<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<ol style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>Well, we all can agree that &#8220;basket&#8221; is a term that is common to trade i.e. publici juris and no person or entity can claim monopoly or exclusive rights in the said term whatsoever and therefore, it is incapable of being monopolised by any trader. Thus, there is no visual or ocular similarity between the two device marks.<\/li>\n<li>Alternatively, the colour scheme, layout, style and overall get-up of the two device marks bearing the terms BigBasket and Daily Basket are different. There is no scope for confusion \u2014logos, websites as well as mobile application user interfaces.<\/li>\n<li>It is pertinent to note here that BigBasket in its reply filed to examination report has overcome Section 11 objection raised by the Registry against a cited mark, for e.g. &#8220;Apna Big Basket&#8221; by stating that \u201ca mark should be considered and compared as a whole and should not be compared in parts in order to determine a conflict with another mark\u201d. Subsequently, it has also submitted that the cited mark is visually, structurally and phonetically, very different from the subject mark i.e. BigBasket. By this very logic, Daily Basket can also claim their marks to be different when compared as a whole and disclaim their exclusive rights over the term &#8220;Basket&#8221; as and when directed by the Registry \u2014 if the situation arises in the future.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<ol style=\"text-align: justify;\" start=\"4\">\n<li>On the other hand, if Big Basket can prove that it has acquired distinctiveness\/secondary meaning through long and uninterrupted commercial use and prove that the consumer may associate their brand over others with the goods in question and none other, they can make a strong case during the course of trial, if any. However, in doing so, another closely similar mark i.e. \u201cGodrej Nature\u2019s Basket\u201d may cause an impediment in their pursuit to exclusive use\/monopoly over the term &#8220;basket&#8221;. It is to be noted here that Godrej is the prior user and adopter and is using the mark Nature\u2019s Basket in conjunction with their well-known brand \u201cGodrej\u201d such as <img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-246261 alignleft\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Natures-Basket-logo.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"97\" height=\"47\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Natures-Basket-logo.png 200w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Natures-Basket-logo-60x29.png 60w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 97px) 100vw, 97px\" \/>since long, hence, the very sole reason it could not oppose their mark in the first place.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<ol style=\"text-align: justify;\" start=\"5\">\n<li>Bullying? I do not think so. It has become the modus operandi for intellectual property firms and well-known companies to serve &#8220;cease and desist&#8221; letters to new entrants\/start-ups\/small companies\/entrepreneurs in India to ward off any potential threat or dilution of one\u2019s brand in order to claim exclusivity in the market. This is a standard protocol adopted by firms by regularly checking trade mark journals every once in a week to check whether there is any similar and\/or identical mark in the records of the Trade Marks Registry. However, upon a preliminary internet search it could have missed out to oppose another online grocery store named &#8220;Your Daily Basket&#8221;<a href=\"#_ftn15\" name=\"_ftnref15\">[15]<\/a>, which seems to be based in Noida, Uttar Pradesh and other companies\/firms alike. The website claims a copyright dating 2017.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<ol style=\"text-align: justify;\" start=\"6\">\n<li>It is worth mentioning here that every startup these days are in a hurry to launch their products\/company in the market without doing a proper survey and\/or consulting a trade mark attorney or conducing a clearance search before adopting a brand and ultimately, cutting on costs. It is imperative these days that one should adopt these methods or one should be ready to bear the brunt.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<ol style=\"text-align: justify;\" start=\"7\">\n<li>It is a good strategy on part of Daily Basket that it has launched a dedicated website to debunk various claims made by BigBasket in turn making it public and gaining sympathy and garnering support, however, what one cannot understand is why would you adopt a closely similar and\/or identical name of your brand that may become a cause for concern. It is highly improbable\/unlikely that they will be able to register their trade mark without any opposition from third parties. There are various \u201cBig\u201d formative marks, marks containing with the suffix &#8220;Basket&#8221; already existing in the market within the same segment of goods and services.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #000080;\"><strong>VIII. Advise to startups<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<ol style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>Invest your time in creating a distinctive trade mark before you launch your company \u2014 Think Big, Get Creative rather than simply launching your brand hurriedly with no impact or making tweaks to an already existing product in the market, be innovative.<\/li>\n<li>Consult a trade mark attorney or a specialist before you launch a product and conduct a trade mark clearance search.<\/li>\n<li>If you are bootstrapped, there are many organisations providing free legal assistance and pro bono advice. Do a simple online search.<\/li>\n<li>Conduct a due diligence exercise such as this becomes although more necessary when you operate in a competitive market wherein a company is able to foresee any lacunae or legal dispute that may arise in the future.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #808000;\">\u2020Yashvardhan Rana, Intellectual Property Lawyer, Esteemed Member, FICCI IP Forum. He can be contacted at \u00a0<a style=\"color: #808000;\" href=\"mailto:yash0843@gmail.com\">yash0843@gmail.com<\/a>.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" name=\"_ftn1\"><sup>[1]<\/sup><\/a> &lt;<a href=\"https:\/\/dailybasket.com\/\">https:\/\/dailybasket.com<\/a>&gt;.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" name=\"_ftn2\"><sup>[2]<\/sup><\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.scribd.com\/document\/495188261\/Cease-and-Desist-Notice?secret_password=tHnV6KHZHCJvzkRMXXtM#download&amp;from_embed\">https:\/\/www.scribd.com\/document\/495188261\/Cease-and-Desist-Notice? secret_password=tHnV6KHZHCJvzkRMXXtM#download&amp;from_embed<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftn3\" name=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a>.https:\/\/economictimes.indiatimes.com\/tech\/startups\/tata-group-to-take-1-3-billion-stake-in-bigbasket- report\/articleshow\/80982050.cms .<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftn4\" name=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" name=\"_ftn3\"><\/a>https:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/wex\/cease_and_desist_letter .<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" name=\"_ftn5\"><sup>[5]<\/sup><\/a> https:\/\/twitter.com\/bigbasket_com\/status\/1364445472811675652.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" name=\"_ftn6\"><sup>[6]<\/sup><\/a>https:\/\/www.ipwatchdog.com\/2015\/07\/16\/trademark-bullying-defending-your-brand-or-vexatious-business-tactics\/id=59155\/.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" name=\"_ftn7\"><sup>[7]<\/sup><\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/1CLFspfD\">2015 SCC OnLine Del 11505<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref8\" name=\"_ftn8\"><sup>[8]<\/sup><\/a> https:\/\/www.wikiwand.com\/en\/United_States_trademark_law.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref9\" name=\"_ftn9\"><sup>[9]<\/sup><\/a> https:\/\/cyber.harvard.edu\/people\/tfisher\/IP\/1976_Abercrombie_Abridged.pdf<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref10\" name=\"_ftn10\"><sup>[10]<\/sup><\/a> https:\/\/www.wikiwand.com\/en\/Trademark_distinctiveness.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref11\" name=\"_ftn11\"><sup>[11]<\/sup><\/a> Section 29(2) in The Trade Marks Act, 1999.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref12\" name=\"_ftn12\"><sup>[12]<\/sup><\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/P2X3Trsz\">(1969) 2 SCC 716<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref13\" name=\"_ftn13\">[13]<\/a> 32 RPC 133 at 136<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref14\" name=\"_ftn14\"><sup>[14]<\/sup><\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/1QgHg7x5\">(2001) 5 SCC 73<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"#_ftnref15\" name=\"_ftn15\"><sup>[15]<\/sup><\/a> yourdailybasket.com\/ .<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>by Yashvardhan Rana\u2020<\/p>\n<p>Cite as : 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 18<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":246266,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[42503,1191],"tags":[45563,45564,31546,3221,45565],"class_list":["post-246263","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-legal-analysis","category-op-ed","tag-big-basket","tag-daily-basket","tag-ip","tag-Trademark","tag-yashvardhan"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Big Basket and Daily Basket in trade mark row: Bullying, consumer confusion or justified? | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Big Basket and Daily Basket in trade mark row: Bullying, consumer confusion or justified?\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"by Yashvardhan Rana\u2020  Cite as : 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 18\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-03-30T05:49:18+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-07-01T10:31:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-36.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/\",\"name\":\"Big Basket and Daily Basket in trade mark row: Bullying, consumer confusion or justified? | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-36.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-03-30T05:49:18+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-07-01T10:31:11+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-36.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-36.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Big Basket and Daily Basket in trade mark row: Bullying, consumer confusion or justified?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Big Basket and Daily Basket in trade mark row: Bullying, consumer confusion or justified? | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Big Basket and Daily Basket in trade mark row: Bullying, consumer confusion or justified?","og_description":"by Yashvardhan Rana\u2020  Cite as : 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 18","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-03-30T05:49:18+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-07-01T10:31:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-36.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/","name":"Big Basket and Daily Basket in trade mark row: Bullying, consumer confusion or justified? | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-36.jpg","datePublished":"2021-03-30T05:49:18+00:00","dateModified":"2021-07-01T10:31:11+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-36.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-36.jpg","width":1330,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/30\/big-basket-and-daily-basket-in-trade-mark-row-bullying-consumer-confusion-or-justified\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Big Basket and Daily Basket in trade mark row: Bullying, consumer confusion or justified?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-36.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":348081,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/17\/how-to-enforce-your-trade-mark-rights-cease-and-desist-litigation-and-more\/","url_meta":{"origin":246263,"position":0},"title":"How to Enforce Your Trade Mark Rights: Cease and Desist, Litigation and More","author":"Editor","date":"May 17, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"by Divyang Chandan*","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Op Eds&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Enforce Your Trade Mark","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Enforce-Your-Trade-Mark.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Enforce-Your-Trade-Mark.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Enforce-Your-Trade-Mark.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Enforce-Your-Trade-Mark.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":318667,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/29\/dhc-restrains-use-of-mark-wow-punjabi-being-identical-deceptively-similar-to-mark-wow-momo-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":246263,"position":1},"title":"Delhi High Court restrains use of mark \u2018Wow Punjabi\u2019 being identical\/deceptively similar to mark \u2018Wow! Momo\u2019","author":"Simranjeet","date":"March 29, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Plaintiff, Wow Momo made out prima facie case for grant of ex parte ad interim injunction and balance of convenience also lies in favour of plaintiff.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Wow Punjabi mark and Wow! Momo mark","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-20-1-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-20-1-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-20-1-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-20-1-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":335145,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/14\/bomhc-grants-temporary-injunction-to-campa-in-trade-mark-infringement-case-against-jhampa\/","url_meta":{"origin":246263,"position":2},"title":"Bombay HC grants temporary injunction to mark \u201cCAMPA\u201d in a trade mark infringement case against \u201cJHAMPA\u201d","author":"Simranjeet","date":"November 14, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Defendant\u2019s dishonesty is evident as only after defendant received applicant\u2019s cease-and-desist notice, it filed a trade mark application for the impugned mark \u201cJHAMPA\u201d on 05-09-2024, claiming use from 01-01-2024.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":296369,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/10\/exception-bonafide-use-of-name-as-trademark-u-s35-will-not-extend-to-name-of-spouse-madras-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":246263,"position":3},"title":"[SANGEETHA v NEW SANGEETHA] Exception of bona fide use of name as trade mark does not extend to the name of spouse: Madras High Court grants permanent injunction","author":"Apoorva","date":"July 10, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court has also granted the plaintiff a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from committing passing off of its restaurant business by using deceptively similar trade mark.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"madras high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":304484,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/12\/sc-restrains-mariyas-soaps-from-using-mark-chandra-against-wipro-chandrika-trade-mark-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":246263,"position":4},"title":"Wipro\u2019s \u2018Chandrika\u2019 Soap | SC restrains Mariyas Soaps and Chemicals from using mark \u2018Chandra\u2019","author":"Editor","date":"October 12, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Wipro Enterprises has a registered all India trade mark \u2018Chandrika\u2019 since 1976.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Wipro's 'Chandrika' trade mark","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/Wipros-Chandrika-trade-mark.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/Wipros-Chandrika-trade-mark.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/Wipros-Chandrika-trade-mark.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/Wipros-Chandrika-trade-mark.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":373487,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-tiger-and-brand-generic-terms-cant-be-monopolized\/","url_meta":{"origin":246263,"position":5},"title":"Know why Delhi HC ruled marks &#8216;TIGER&#8217; and &#8216;BRAND&#8217; are generic; cannot be monopolized","author":"Prarthana Gupta","date":"January 22, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe mark \u2018TIGER\u2019 is publici juris and common to trade and is not uniquely identifiable with a particular goods or services of the Plaintiff.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"TIGER BRAND trade mark","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/TIGER-BRAND-trade-mark-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/TIGER-BRAND-trade-mark-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/TIGER-BRAND-trade-mark-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/TIGER-BRAND-trade-mark-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246263","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=246263"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246263\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/246266"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=246263"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=246263"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=246263"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}