In a recent ruling, the Bombay High Court issued a temporary restraining order against a Lonavla Trampoline Park for unauthorised use of the Mr. Bean trademark, character, and artwork from the renowned comedy series.
The court scrutinised the similarities between the registered Mr. Bean trademark and the allegedly infringing trademark of the trampoline park. Consequently, it barred the park from engaging in any commercial activities utilising marks resembling ‘Mr. Bean’ or any other similar trademark, artwork, or character.
The legal dispute unfolded in the context of a commercial intellectual property lawsuit filed by Tiger Aspect Kids & Family Ltd. against Mr. Bean Trampoline Park in Lonavla, operated by Rupesh Dighe. The plaintiff, a UK company under the Banijay Group, alleged trademark infringement and passing off of goodwill.
Banijay Group, headquartered in Paris, France, boasts an extensive portfolio of media productions, including iconic titles like ‘Survivor,’ ‘Big Brother,’ and ‘Mr. Bean.’ As the producer of the Mr. Bean series, the plaintiff asserted ownership of copyrights and merchandising rights over Mr. Bean’s original artistic works, trademarks, devices, and characters.
The plaintiff contended that despite cease and desist notices, the defendant persisted in exploiting its trademarks, artwork, and character for commercial purposes. Notably, the defendant’s park was advertised as ‘Mr. Been Trampoline Park,’ suggesting an association with the plaintiff’s brand. Moreover, the park featured themed attractions and merchandise bearing Mr. Bean-related marks.
Following the plaintiff’s lawsuit, the court found substantial evidence of trademark infringement and granted an interim injunction against the defendant. The injunction prohibits the defendant from infringing upon the plaintiff’s trademarks and copyrights until further deliberation scheduled for June 14, 2024.
Advocates representing the plaintiffs, including Hiren Kamod, Rahul Dhote, Anushree Rauta, Shwetank Tripathi, Prem Khullar, Vidit Desai, and Umang Sheth, argued convincingly for the protection of their client’s intellectual property rights.
