How Trademark Law Rewrites Public Health Narratives:-

The Indian pharmaceutical market is overcrowded with various ‘sound-alike’ and ‘look-alike’ (LASA)drug names. Not only do these medicines circulate freely in commerce but also co-exist with other such trademarks on the Trade Marks Register under Class 05. Some of the most commonly used medicine names often start with the prefixes i.e., ‘PARA- ‘, ‘OXYN- ‘and suffixes i.e., ‘-MOL’, ‘-CIN’, amongst various other generic names. Hence, generic names and the original product are interchangeably used in the Indian market, even though they are not inherently interchangeable and this may end up confusing the consumers. Thus, the doctrine of “heightened caution” is followed in cases involving goods in the medicinal sector. The burden of due diligence for approving pharma drug names is largely on the Indian Trademarks Registry and the Courts. In the case of Macleods Pharmaceuticals vs. Union of India, the main issue was whether the mark “OFLOMAC” of the petitioner was of such a nature as to deceive the public or cause confusion with respect to the mark “OFRAMAX” of respondent as envisaged under Section 9(2)(a) and Section 11(1)(b) of Trade Mark Act, 1999 Act.It was concluded that slight confusion in relation to medicinal products can lead to irreversible and grave consequences, requiring the Courts to lessen the standard of proof of infringement. It was held that the mark “OFLOMAC” is likely to cause confusion and deceive the consumers.

The connection between public health and trademark infringement is clear: mislabelled medicines rely on the misuse of trusted trademarks to deceive consumers and infiltrate legitimate markets.

However, the names of such products are often overlapping as they originate from a disease they are curing, or it indicates the chemical component as well.