What do you understand by the term ‘trademark’?

What is the infringement of trademark?

Key takeaways:

• As per the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Intellectual Property (IP) encompasses mental creations such as technological inventions, artistic and literary works, unique designs, as well as symbols, logos, and brand identifiers used in trade. Legal instruments like patents, copyrights, and trademarks safeguard IP, enabling individuals to gain recognition or financial rewards from their innovations. The IP regime seeks to maintain a balance between the rights of creators and public interest, promoting an atmosphere that nurtures innovation and creativity.

• The Hamdard National Foundation India, the charitable arm of Hamdard, has initiated legal proceedings against Patanjali Foods Limited and Baba Ramdev, alleging trademark violation, disparagement, and defamation. This action is in response to a video in which Ramdev reportedly stated that the earnings of a rival brand were being used to fund “masjids and madrasas,” whereas Patanjali’s revenue from its rose-flavored drink was being utilized for establishing “gurukuls, acharyakulams, and Patanjali University.” He further remarked, “Just like love jihad and vote jihad, there is sharbat jihad.”

• In the legal petition, Hamdard is pursuing a permanent injunction to prevent Patanjali from any further trademark misuse or derogatory remarks, demanding damages up to ₹2 crore, along with a formal apology and retraction. Additionally, the company seeks the court’s directive for the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) to remove the offensive content from online platforms. Senior advocate Rajiv Nayar, representing Patanjali, assured the court that the contentious videos would be taken down.

• During the initial court hearing, Justice Bansal expressed strong disapproval, describing the content as “shocking” and stated that it offended the court's conscience. He warned that unless immediate action was taken, the court might pass a severe order.

• Along with monetary and injunctive relief, Hamdard reiterated its request to have the disputed content removed and a public apology issued. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing on behalf of Hamdard, read out excerpts from the video and tweets where Ramdev allegedly referred to Rooh Afza by implication

Follow Up Question

1.In order to comply with TRIPS Agreement, India enacted the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999. The difference/differences between a “Trade Mark” and a Geographical Indications is/are (2010)
1. A Trade Mark is an individual or company’s right whereas a Geographical Indication is a community’s right.
2. A Trade Mark can be licensed whereas a Geographical Indication cannot be licensed.
3. A Trade Mark is assigned to the manufactured goods whereas the Geographical Indication is assigned to the agricultural goods/products and handicrafts only.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 1 and 2 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Why has India got another tiger reserve?

For Preliminary Examination : Current events of national and international importance

For Mains Examination: GS III - Environment & Ecology

Context:

On March 9, Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav announced that the Centre had declared the Madhav National Park in Madhya Pradesh as the country’s 58th tiger reserve. This is the ninth tiger reserve in the State, the highest among the States. Maharashtra has six; Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, and Karnataka have five each.

Source: The Hindu

Read about:

National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA)

Project tiger

Key takeaways:

Rationale for Establishing Tiger Reserves

Historically, tigers were widespread across India, but their population declined significantly due to hunting, poaching, and the colonial-era exploitation of forests for timber. In 1964, estimates suggested that around 40,000 tigers roamed India at the beginning of the 20th century. However, by the 1960s, rampant hunting, the increase in gun licenses post-independence, easier access to forests, large-scale deforestation, and the rise of commercial "Shikar Companies" and the fur trade had reduced their numbers to between 2,000 and 4,000.

Concerned about this decline, naturalists raised alarms, prompting the Indian Board for Wildlife (IBWL)—a predecessor to the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL)—to convene a meeting in New Delhi in July 1969. It recommended an outright ban on the export of wild cat skins, including tigers. That same year, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), during its 10th Assembly in Delhi, included tigers in its Red Data Book, classifying them as an endangered species and advocating for a ban on tiger hunting.

With numbers dwindling to approximately 1,863, then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi commissioned an 11-member Task Force to assess the situation and propose conservation strategies. In August 1972, the Task Force recommended protecting eight tiger habitats across India under what became ‘Project Tiger’. The initiative was officially launched on April 1, 1973, at Corbett Tiger Reserve, with an initial set of nine tiger reserves representing different tiger ecosystems:

1. Corbett (Uttarakhand, formerly Uttar Pradesh)
2. Palamau (Jharkhand, formerly Bihar)
3. Simlipal (Odisha)
4. Sundarbans (West Bengal)
5. Manas (Assam)
6. Ranthambore (Rajasthan)
7. Kanha (Madhya Pradesh)
8. Melghat (Maharashtra)
9. Bandipur (Karnataka)

What Does Establishing a Tiger Reserve Involve?

Since 2006, Project Tiger has been overseen by the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), which requires every tiger reserve to operate under a site-specific management plan. This initiative laid the foundation for the scientific management of protected areas, introducing key concepts such as:

• Core Zones and Buffer Zones to safeguard tiger habitats.
• Protection measures and habitat restoration techniques.
• Field research to monitor changes in flora and fauna populations.
• Systematic animal population estimation and conservation strategies.

Additionally, the NTCA mandates the creation of Tiger Conservation Plans (TCPs) to ensure:

1. Protection and habitat management for sustaining viable populations of tigers, prey, and co-predators.
2. Ecologically compatible land use within reserves and connecting corridors to balance conservation with local community livelihoods.

Given that some reserves are small and surrounded by human settlements, NTCA's strategy involves creating source populations within tiger reserves and establishing corridors that link these sources to surrounding areas, known as sink habitats. Source areas support growing tiger populations, while sink habitats require tiger reintroduction efforts to maintain viable numbers.

The process of declaring a tiger reserve involves:

• The State Government submitting a proposal to the Centre.
• NTCA evaluating the proposal and recommending it after a thorough review.
• The State Government officially designating the area as a Tiger Reserve

Funding for Tiger Reserves

Under Project Tiger, funding responsibilities are divided between the Central and State Governments:

• For most states: The Centre contributes 60%, while the respective State Government provides 40%.
• For Northeastern and Himalayan States: The Centre covers 90% of the expenses.

These funds are allocated for:

• Anti-poaching measures and wildlife protection.
• Habitat restoration and water resource development.
• Human-wildlife conflict mitigation and establishing inviolate spaces for tigers.
• Relocation of villages from critical tiger habitats with improved rehabilitation packages.
• Recognizing and settling the rights of displaced communities and rehabilitating traditional hunting tribes.
• Independent monitoring and evaluation of tiger reserve

Scientists demonstrate clear quantum advantage using simple game

For Preliminary Examination:  Current events of national and international Significance

For Mains Examination: GS III - Science & Technology

Context:

Previous attempts at showing quantum supremacy have used complicated problems. Google used random circuit sampling for its Sycamore processor, andChinese researchers used the Gaussian boson sampling problem for the Jiuzhang computer. Both require specialised equipment to perform, making it difficult to verify the results

Read about:

National Quantum Computing Mission

Quantum Computer

Key takeaways:

• For years, scientists have been seeking a task where quantum computers outperform classical computers, a benchmark known as quantum supremacy.
• Recently, researchers from the University of Oxford and Universidad de Sevilla achieved this milestone using a relatively simple game-based approach. Their findings, published in Physical Review Letters in February, are based on a problem involving odd-cycle graphs.
• The challenge is to colour a circle with an odd number of points using only two colours in such a way that no two adjacent points share the same colour—an outcome that is mathematically impossible.
• The researchers turned this puzzle into a test for quantum supremacy, moving away from earlier, more complex demonstrations. For instance, Google used a task known as random circuit sampling to demonstrate its Sycamore processor’s capabilities in 2019, while Chinese researchers employed Gaussian boson sampling on the Jiuzhang quantum computer. These methods, however, require intricate math and specialised tools, making external validation difficult.

The Colouring Challenge

• In the adapted experiment, the odd-cycle graph problem is used in a game format. Imagine a circle with three points—trying to colour them using only red and blue such that adjacent points don’t match will always lead to a contradiction.
• In this game, two players, Alice and Bob, who cannot communicate, respond to questions from a referee about the colours of points on the circle. To win, their responses must meet two criteria: they must give the same answer for the same point, and different answers for adjacent points.
• In a classical scenario, even with an agreed strategy beforehand, the best possible win rate for a 3-point circle is 83.3%.

Quantum Implementation

• In the quantum version, researchers used two strontium atoms placed two metres apart and entangled them using laser beams. Entangled particles behave in a way that classical physics cannot explain—measuring one instantly affects the other.
• A central computer (referee) sent queries to separate control systems representing Alice and Bob. Upon receiving a question, each system used quantum operations (rotations determined by the specific point on the circle) to manipulate their atom and derive a result—either 0 or 1, which was then translated into red or blue.
• The experiment was conducted over 101,000 rounds, covering odd cycles with 3 to 27 points, in just under a minute. The researchers also conducted rigorous tests to confirm the quantum nature of the correlations.

Proving Quantum Advantage

• The results were striking. For the 3-point scenario alone, the quantum strategy achieved a significantly higher win rate than 83.3%, demonstrating quantum supremacy up to 19-point circles. The overall win rate was 97.8%, with the 2.2% error attributed to noise during entanglement.
• Additionally, their test revealed the strongest correlation ever observed between two separate quantum systems, further validating the quantum nature of the experiment.

Significance of the Study

• This research presents a far simpler pathway to demonstrating quantum supremacy. While Google needed 53 superconducting qubits for its Sycamore processor, this experiment used only two entangled qubits, making it far less complex and resource-intensive.
• The method has practical implications. It could be useful in coordination problems where parties cannot communicate, such as the rendezvous task—determining a common meeting point without sharing information.
• Unlike classical systems that rely on exhaustive search methods, quantum entanglement enables faster, more efficient problem-solving. For example, identifying one correct option out of a million would take up to a million steps for a classical computer, whereas a quantum computer using Grover’s algorithm could do it in roughly 1,000 steps