Introduction

Luxury is not just about design it’s about identity. And in the digital age, that identity is under constant threat.

As India’s luxury market rapidly expands, global fashion houses face an increasingly complex intellectual property (IP) landscape. Brands such as Chanel, Gucci, and Prada are encountering unique legal and enforcement challenges in India ranging from digital piracy and influencer misuse to grey market goods and trade dress imitation. While counterfeiting remains a major concern, the greater threat may lie in the nuanced and often under-addressed areas of brand dilution, unauthorized associations, and insufficient platform accountability.

In today’s economy, where clicks travel faster than court orders, traditional IP registration is no longer sufficient. Luxury brands must adopt a multi-pronged protection strategy that is contextually grounded in Indian law, commercially informed, and responsive to the evolving digital environment.

Protect the Design. Defend the Brand. Own the Narrative.

This article outlines a forward-looking framework for IP protection and enforcement in India, tailored specifically for high-end fashion brands seeking sustainable market presence.

1. The Legal Framework for Fashion IP in India

India’s IP regime provides comprehensive protection through the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the Copyright Act, 1957, and the Designs Act, 2000. However, fashion-specific nuances are not always addressed within the current legislative framework. Notably, India lacks a sui generis system for unregistered designs, which makes it challenging to safeguard fast-evolving fashion collections.

As a result, fashion houses must strategically leverage existing laws to protect their brand equity, including overlapping IP filings and tailored enforcement mechanisms.

For instance, in Christian Louboutin SAS v. Mr. Pawan Kumar & Ors., the Delhi High Court recognized the distinct red sole of Louboutin shoes as a well-known trademark and granted an injunction against its unauthorized use. This case is a significant milestone for non-traditional mark protection in India and signals judicial willingness to uphold luxury brand rights even in cases of color marks.

2. Trademark and Trade Dress Protection: Strategic Filings

To ensure robust protection, luxury brands should adopt a layered IP filing strategy:

  • Multi-Class Filings: Register core brand elements (logos, names, patterns) across multiple classes including apparel, accessories, cosmetics, and retail services.
  • Trade Dress Elements: Protect distinctive features such as packaging, stitching patterns, product silhouettes, and retail store layouts.
  • Regional Variants: File transliterated and vernacular versions of brand names to avoid misuse.
  • Non-Traditional Marks: Where feasible, register sound, color, and pattern marks central to brand identity.

In Tata Sons Ltd. v. Manoj Dodia & Ors., the Bombay High Court emphasized that even visual similarities in get-up, packaging, and overall appearance can amount to trade dress infringement, thereby reinforcing the value of protecting the overall aesthetic and presentation of luxury products.

3. Enforcement Mechanisms Beyond Registration

IP enforcement in India extends beyond litigation. Effective tools include:

  • Customs Recordation: Under the Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007, brands may register their marks with Indian Customs to intercept counterfeit imports at border points.
  • Market Investigations: Engage private investigators for market surveillance and evidence gathering in physical and digital marketplaces.
  • Civil and Criminal Action: Simultaneously pursue injunctive relief, damages, and criminal prosecution against infringers, especially in cases involving organized counterfeit operations.

In Louis Vuitton Malletier v. Atul Jaggi & Ors., the Delhi High Court granted a permanent injunction and punitive damages against a local trader for selling counterfeit Louis Vuitton products. The judgment reiterated that the damage to a luxury brand’s goodwill and reputation warrants serious judicial scrutiny and monetary deterrence.

From showroom to street stall your brand deserves protection at every level.

4. Addressing Parallel Imports and Grey Market Goods

Following the Delhi High Court’s ruling in Kapil Wadhwa v. Samsung Electronics, India follows the principle of international exhaustion, which permits parallel imports. Nevertheless, luxury brands may still take action under:

  • Contractual Limitations: Drafting restrictive covenants in international distribution agreements.
  • Consumer Protection Claims: Where parallel imports mislead consumers or do not conform to Indian warranty standards, remedies may arise under the Consumer Protection Act or the Trade Marks Act.

5. Digital Risk Management: Influencers and E-Commerce

The rise of influencer marketing and digital commerce has exposed fashion brands to new forms of IP risk:

  • False Brand Association: Unauthorized brand tagging or use of logos in social media content may imply endorsement or affiliation.
  • Fake Collaborations: Monitor and address unauthorized giveaways, reseller partnerships, or dropshipping arrangements using brand assets.
  • Platform Remedies: Utilize India’s advertising codes (e.g., ASCI Guidelines) and IT Rules to seek takedowns and report misleading promotions.

In Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Curetech Skincare, the Delhi High Court granted an injunction against the use of a deceptively similar brand name in online advertising and held that digital use through keywords and tags can amount to infringement. Although this case was in the pharmaceutical context, the underlying principle applies equally to digital brand misappropriation in fashion.

If your brand is viral, your risk is too. Online fame needs offline legal firewalls.

6. Contractual Safeguards in Retail Partnerships

As brands expand in India through licensing, franchising, or joint ventures, legal agreements must be meticulously drafted to maintain control over IP and brand experience:

  • IP Ownership Clauses: Retain ownership and grant limited, revocable rights to use brand assets.
  • Quality Assurance Provisions: Incorporate audit rights, training requirements, and compliance obligations.
  • Termination and Exit Mechanisms: Ensure clear reversion clauses for brand recovery in case of breach or disengagement.

7. Policy Imperatives: A Roadmap for Reform

To strengthen IP protection for fashion brands, the following policy reforms are warranted:

  • Design Law Modernization: Introduce unregistered design rights or simplified mechanisms for short lifecycle products.
  • Border Enforcement Enhancements: Foster public-private collaboration for real-time data sharing and capacity building.
  • E-Commerce Accountability: Mandate seller traceability, faster takedown processes, and proactive content moderation on platforms.

Conclusion

Luxury is legacy and legacy must be legally guarded.

As global luxury brands deepen their investment in India, they must recalibrate their IP strategies to reflect the jurisdiction’s unique legal, cultural, and commercial dynamics. Proactive trademark registration, diligent enforcement, and well-drafted commercial arrangements are key to preserving brand value.

At the same time, India’s regulatory framework must evolve to keep pace with global fashion industry standards. Tailored legal reform, technological enforcement tools, and stronger industry-regulator engagement can collectively ensure that innovation and investment in the fashion sector are adequately safeguarded.

By addressing these challenges head-on, luxury fashion houses can not only mitigate risk but also unlock sustained brand loyalty in one of the world’s most promising markets.

Fashion is fleeting. Protection should be permanent.

Disclaimer: The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Authors:

  • Mohit Porwal, Associate Partner
  • Vidhi Agrawal, Associate