Delhi HC Slaps Hefty Fine on Amazon for Trademark Infringement
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has ordered Amazon to pay $39 million (approximately Rs 340 crore) in damages to Lifestyle Equities, finding the e-commerce giant guilty of infringing upon the Beverly Hills Polo Club trademark.
Justice Prathiba M. Singh issued the ruling, with a detailed judgment yet to be released. The case stemmed from a 2020 lawsuit filed by Lifestyle Equities CV, which alleged that Amazon Technologies and other entities used a deceptively similar mark on apparel and various other products sold on their platforms.
The claim specifically targeted Amazon Technologies for manufacturing and selling products under the brand Symbol, which bore the infringing logo. Cloudtail India was also implicated in the sale of these items on Amazon.in.
The High Court had previously issued an interim injunction on October 12, 2020, preventing Amazon and its affiliates from using the disputed mark. Amazon Seller Services was directed to remove the infringing products from its platform. Amazon Technologies failed to appear in court and was proceeded against ex parte, with the interim injunction later made permanent.
In 2023, Cloudtail India admitted to using the infringing mark between 2015 and July 2020. Revenue generated from these products totalled Rs 23,92,420, with an approximate profit margin of 20 per cent. The company attempted a settlement and expressed willingness to accept an injunction, but mediation efforts were unsuccessful.
Cloudtail’s counsel argued that liability for damages should rest solely on them, based on an Amazon Brand License and Distribution Agreement. However, Lifestyle Equities contended that the infringing mark wasn’t covered under this agreement, and insisted that both Amazon and Cloudtail be held accountable.
The court acknowledged Cloudtail’s admission of liability and awarded Rs 4,78,484 in damages, representing 20 per cent of the infringing sales revenue. However, the court determined that Lifestyle Equities was also within its rights to seek damages from Amazon.
Amazon Seller Services, recognized as an intermediary, complied with the court’s directives and agreed to remove future listings of infringing products. Consequently, it was removed from the list of parties involved in the case.
