Lifestyle Equities secured $39 million (approximately ₹340 crore) as damages from the Delhi High Court because Amazon violated its ‘Beverly Hills Polo Club’ Trademark Infringement Case.
In 2020 the company Lifestyle Equities CV initiated a legal trademark infringement dispute with Amazon Technologies and others about their use of a deceptive likeness of the “BEVERLY HILLS POLO CLUB” logo/device marks on their online merchandise platforms.
On October 12th 2020 the High Court blocked Amazon and others from using the infringing logo by ordering Amazon Seller Services to remove infringing products from their platform through an initial temporary injunction. Amazon Technologies skipped its court appearance thus the court proceeded against it alone.
A High Court judge confirmed the interim injunction and maintained it as a permanent order. The partnership between Cloudtail India and the court went through multiple attempts at settlement and injunction decree acceptance but ended in a failed mediation process in 2023. Cloudtail admitted to utilizing the infringing mark in their activities from 2015 up to July 2020 during which they earned revenue totaling ₹23,92,420 at a profit margin of around 20%.
The legal representative of Cloudtail maintained that complete responsibility for damages fell on Cloudtail based on an Amazon Brand License and Distribution Agreement which established Cloudtail as bear the liability for any violation. Lifestyle argued that the infringed mark was not included in the agreement between them and both Amazon and Cloudtail required responsibility.
Although Cloudtail made an admission of legal obligation the court maintained that Lifestyle still retained its right to pursue compensation claims from Amazon. The court issued a declatory ruling in favor of Lifestyle against Cloudtail after reviewing the unrebutted sales data from Cloudtail which allowed Lifestyle to claim damages totaling ₹4,78,484 which corresponded to 20 Percent of the illegal product revenue. Amazon Seller Services functioned as an intermediary under the court’s recognition while following the company’s provided instructions. Because Amazon Seller Services refused substantive relief requests and promised to delist all infringing items they were excluded from the court proceedings.
We await the full court order written by Justice Prathiba M Singh.
Also Read: How KAS & Co Can Help Your Company Win Millions from Amazon for Trademark Infringement