Apple appealed against a single judge order of March 1 preventing the tech giant from using the term in its operating systems Mac OS X El Capitan and iOS 9. Apple appealed against a single judge order of March 1 preventing the tech giant from using the term in its operating systems Mac OS X El Capitan and iOS 9.

The Delhi High Court earlier this week vacated an injunction preventing Apple, Inc. from using the term SplitView in India. The April 7 ruling by the Bench consisting Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Mukta Gupta came after Apple appealed against a single judge order of March 1 restraining it from using the term in its operating systems Mac OS X El Capitan and iOS 9.

The initial order came after Rohit Singh of Vyooh Low Level Computing LLP claimed he developed SplitView, Disk View and ViewScribe and has been selling since 2005. Singh claimed SplitView “is capable of being a trademark because the word Split and the word View are not words that would ordinarily be used in conjunction with each other”.

Finding that Singh was first to develop this functionality, the single judge ruled restraining Apple Inc “from in any manner using the trademark SplitView for any of the programmes and features within a programme or in any hardware or software”. However, Apple contended that “OS X El Capitan is the product which is bought and sold in the virtual market place of which Split View is a feature”. It also added that the term ‘Split View’ was never conceptualised by the respondents and has been used by companies around the world for many years, for instance Apple’s predecessor NeXT Computer, Inc used NXSplit View and NSSplitView in the 1990s for a multi-window functionality.

Apple’s counsel argued that hence “a commonly used phrase such as Split View cannot be said to be distinctive of a software programme because it is descriptive of the multi-window functionality provided by companies around the world for several decades and a consumer would never rely on a descriptive phrase to distinguish the product of the respondents…”

“In a nutshell, our finding would be that on the existing material before the learned Single Judge case was not made out to grant an ex-parte ad-interim injunction because an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in a matter concerning trademark violation should ensue only if a very strong prima-facie case is made out with respect to a trade mark which is inherently distinctive,” the bench observed in the April 7 order.

Vacating the ex-parte ad-interim injunction dated March 01, 2016, the bench directed Apple to file its written statements of defence within two weeks and along therewith file all documents it seek to rely upon. The next date of hearing before the Single Judge is May 09, 2016.

📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest Technology News, download Indian Express App.

© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd