‘VAPORIN’ Doesn’t Infringe ‘VICKS VAPORUB’ Mark: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court rejected Procter & Gamble’s request to remove the trademarks “VAPORIN” and “VAPORIN COLD RUB” from the register.

The case arose from trademark rectification petitions filed by P&G claiming that IPI India’s marks were deceptively similar to its product “VICKS VAPORUB.”

The Court held that the word “VAPO” is descriptive in nature and has become publici juris, and therefore, no exclusive rights can be claimed over it. It observed that trademarks must be assessed as a whole and found that “VAPORIN” is phonetically, visually, and structurally different from “VICKS VAPORUB.”

The Court concluded that the marks were unlikely to mislead consumers and upheld the validity of IPI’s registrations.

[The Procter @ Gamble Company v. IPI India Pvt Ltd. & Anr.]