Bombay High Court Refuses To Restrain Cognizant From Using Hexagonal Logo In Atyati's Copyright Dispute

The Bombay High Court has refused to restrain Cognizant Technology Solutions from using its hexagonal logo, holding that fintech software company Atyati Technologies had failed to make out a case for interim relief after Cognizant prima facie established that the mark was independently created.

Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh observed that, "It is not merely the existence of a similar logo somewhere in some part of the world but the copying of the logo which would obstruct the Plaintiff's claim to monopoly over the use of the “ATYATI” logo on originality."

The dispute concerns Atyati's orange hexagonal honeycomb device mark, adopted as part of its rebranding exercise in 2019. Atyati told the court that the logo represented its values of collaboration and compassion through a stylised depiction of the letter "C".

In October 2023, Atyati discovered that Cognizant was using a blue hexagonal logo alongside its "COGNIZANT" word mark. It sent a cease-and-desist notice before filing the suit.

The suit was instituted in March 2024, when the court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction. The dispute later reached a Division Bench and the Supreme Court, which directed that the interim application be decided by this court.

Examining the copyright claim, the court found that Cognizant had placed "voluminous persuasive documents" on record, including design agreements, time-entry records and market survey reports, to demonstrate that its logo resulted from an independent creative process.

The court observed, "It is unfathomable that the Defendants would post conceptualization go through the extensive process of refinement of the brand identity by carrying out survey, identifying the logo and document the same, while it intended to merely copy the Atyati logo"

Rejecting Atyati's contention that Cognizant's designers could have accessed its logo, the court applied the test of a "reasonable opportunity of access" rather than a bare possibility of access. It found no material to show that the designers involved in the United States branding exercise had a reasonable opportunity to view Atyati's logo.

The court further observed that, "The magnitude of the Defendant's corporate existence suggests the segregation of every department and it is not possible to accept that merely because the employee force comprises Indian nationals, the Defendant's concerned personnel involved in the rebranding process in United States had the opportunity of viewing the Plaintiff's work. The time distance between the adoption of the Plaintiff's logo in the year 2019, and the process of creation of the Cognisant logo is relatively short to demonstrate a reasonable opportunity of viewing the copyrighted work"

While considering the passing-off claim, the court held that the doctrine of reverse passing-off is maintainable in Indian trademark law, disagreeing with a contrary view taken by the Delhi High Court in Western Digital Technologies Inc. v. Geonix International Pvt. Ltd.

The Delhi High Court had held that the concept of reverse passing-off is foreign to Indian trademark jurisprudence and does not confer an enforceable cause of action. The Bombay High Court, however, held that Atyati had failed to demonstrate standalone goodwill in its logo independent of the word "ATYATI", which it found to be the "leading and essential feature" of its composite mark.

The court also noted the stark difference in the parties' scale and observed that those procuring enterprise IT services are "well informed and technically literate" and are likely to exercise considerable care.

Finding that Cognizant had prima facie established independent creation of its logo, and that Atyati had failed to make out a case of copyright infringement, passing-off or reverse passing-off, the court dismissed the interim application.