RCB takes Uber to court for trademark dig in IPL advert featuring Travis Head
NEW DELHI: The Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB) has moved the Delhi High Court against ride aggregator platform Uber over an IPL-themed advertisement that the franchise claims disparages its trademark.
The dispute revolves around Uber’s latest ‘Hyderabaddie’ campaign promoting its bike taxi service, Uber Moto.
In the ad clip, Australian crickter Travis Head is shown entering RCB’s home ground apparently ahead of an Indian Premier League (IPL) match between Bengaluru and the Sunrisers Hyderabad (SRH).
He goes on to deface a stadium sign reading “Bengaluru vs Hyderabad” by painting over it with the words “Royally Challenged Bengaluru”, a play on RCB’s name. Then, upon being spotted by security personnel, Head escapes on an Uber Moto bike, highlighting the service’s speed and ease.
The imagery and wordplay, according to RCB, go beyond light-hearted marketing and amount to commercial mockery of a registered trademark.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee, hearing the case on Thursday, said there appeared to be merit in the RCB argument.
“At first glance, there does seem to be something that warrants a change,” the judge observed during proceedings.
The court, however, reserved its order on the interim relief sought by RCB, which includes taking down the adversitement pending final adjudication.
The RCB counsel contended that the advertisement wasn’t merely humorous, but rather a deliberate attempt at brand denigration. “You’ve distorted our trademark in a way that mocks us,” they told the court.
“Everyone familiar with the IPL understands this is aimed at RCB, especially since Travis Head was once associated with our team,” the counsel said.
It further argued that IPL franchises carry enormous emotional and commercial weight. “This isn’t just sport; these are commercial entities with fan bases. Uber chose to promote its product by making us the punchline.”
Defending the ad, the counsel for Uber India, urged the high vourt to view the campaign through the lens of satire. “RCB’s claims ignore the spirit of the ad and underestimate the public’s ability to appreciate humour,” they submitted.
The court remarked that perceptions outside the intellectual property legal community might differ, but the campaign did raise valid concerns.