Amazon Seller Services Private Limited (Amazon) operates and manages the India online marketplace through where several third-party sellers and numerous buyers get a chance to interact and conduct business. Amazon owns several marks under various classes one of which is ‘AMAZON’. Amazon is also the owner of copyright in various logos of ‘AMAZON’ under the Copyright Act, 1957.
Amazon’s Amazon Easy (“AE”) program is an assisted shopping program that allows interested parties to set up an ‘Amazon Easy Store’ by getting in touch with Amazon Easy marketing partners. Store owners through AE Store therafter provide assistance to a customer to browse selections, identify and select a product that they like and buy products on marketplace. This allows interested buyers (who would have otherwise placed orders on the marketplace directly) to walk into the ‘Amazon Easy Stores’ and view/experience the product prior to purchasing the same on of ‘AMAZON’ under the Copyright Act, 1957.
Amazon came to know that and others (Rogue entities) were unauthorisedly infringing its mark ‘AMAZON’ as well as logos and offering fake registration services for the AE program through fraudulent websites, instagram and facebook pages. The Rogue entities had also adopted a look and feel identical to that of Amazons’ website One of the entity also offered Amazon’s Dealership/franchise in relation to the AE program. of ‘AMAZON’ under the Copyright Act, 1957.
Therefore, Amazon approached the Delhi High Court seeking grant of ex-parte ad-interim injunction/ temporary restraining order against and others for defrauding the public at large by misrepresenting its association with the services of Amazon Amazon claimed that these Rogue entities had engaged in a pre-planned conspiracy to defraud and dupe innocent members of the public who were interested in registering as an ‘Amazon Easy Store’. Amazon contended that these Rogue entities reached out to the innocent and gullible consumers who were interested in registering as ‘Amazon Easy Store’ and swindled money from them on the pretext that such monies were being collected as part of the registration process for setting up an ‘Amazon Easy Store’. Evidently the Rogue entities were luring unsuspecting members under the false pretext of offering to register them as an ‘Amazon Easy Store’, in the name of Amazon. of ‘AMAZON’ under the Copyright Act, 1957.
Amazon stated that there was a great likelihood that the actual and potential victims will be further induced into believing that the Rogue entities had a connection and/or association with Amazon and/or that the aforesaid fraudulent activity is being perpetuated by Amazon
Amazon-owned Mark  Domain names and marks used by Rogue entities.
Source – Judgement of ‘AMAZON’ under the Copyright Act, 1957.
*We do not claim any copyright in the above image. The same has been reproduced for academic and representational purposes only. of ‘AMAZON’ under the Copyright Act, 1957.
The Court after considering Amazon’s contentions and perusing the documents on record, granted an ex parte injunction in favour of Amazon and restrained the Rogue entities from using the mark, logo and/or domain name ‘AMAZON’, ‘’, etc. which is even closely deceptively similar to ‘AMAZON’. The Court further ordered to suspend all the fake accounts on social media platforms like – Facebook, Instagram, etc. which unethically promote Amazon’s mark, logos or domain names. Lastly, access to the websites which belonged to Rogue entities was directed to be blocked.


Keep yourself acquainted with the latest in IP news. Subscribe to our free newsletter to get regular updates.

Copyright © 2024 R. K. Dewan & Co.