Will Yediyurappa's son Vijayendra take on Siddaramaiah from Varuna in Assembly poll?
Bengaluru, Mar 30: Amid speculation over whom the BJP would field against Karnataka Congress strongman Siddaramaiah in Varuna constitutency in the May 10 Assembly polls, party stalwart B S Yediyurappa on Thursday did not rule out the possibility of his son B Y Vijayendra entering the fray.
Varuna in Mysuru district is among the key seats to watch out for as Siddaramaiah, the Congress legislature party leader and former Chief Minister, has thrown his hat in the ring in this segment, currently represented his son Yathindra.
When asked by reporters whether Vijayendra would be fielded from Varuna, Yediyurappa said, "Discussions are going on. Siddaramaiah knows that his ground is slipping away. I don't think it is so easy for him. We will field a good candidate. We will give a tough fight. Let's see what happens."
The BJP veteran and four-time Chief Minister said the decision on whether to give the Varuna ticket to Vijayendra, who is the state BJP vice-president, would be left to the party's central leadership.
Commenting about it, Siddaramaiah told reporters at the Congress office that he was not bothered about the candidate who would contest against him.
Congress state president D K Shivakumar who was also present, quipped that his party would welcome it if Yediyurappa himself decided to contest from Varuna.
Yediyurappa has announced his retirement from electoral politics.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Delhi HC dismisses IPL team RCB's plea against Uber Moto's YouTube advertisement
New Delhi, May 5 (PTI): The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a plea by Indian Premier League cricket team Royal Challengers Bengaluru against a YouTube advertisement of Uber Moto featuring Sunrisers Hyderabad's cricketer Travis Head, saying no prima facie case of disparagement or infringement of trademark was made out.
The court opined that the general perception created by holistic viewing of the advertisement is one of healthy banter and good-natured lighthearted humour, as it refused to grant an interim injunction on the advertisement.
The high court said in the advertisement there was "no element of demeaning/ criticism/ condemning/ ridiculing/ defaming/ mocking or falsity" with a view to injure or harm the RCB trademark or RCB cricket team.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee dismissed the application by Royal Challengers Bengaluru, saying it does not call for any interference at this stage.
"All throughout the impugned advertisement, there is no (in)direct imputation/ insinuation/ comparison/ exaggeration/ sensationalism/ distortion of matters of fact of any kind by any of the defendants against the RCB trademark/ RCB cricket team," the court said in its 35-page order.
Royal Challengers Sports Private Limited filed a suit against Uber India Systems Pvt Ltd claiming that Uber Moto's YouTube advertisement titled "Baddies in Bengaluru ft. Travis Head" disparages its trademark.
The court, which passed the order on an interim application by RCB for relief, added the advertisement cannot be said to be false and misleading at this stage and there is no scope of any kind of irreparable harm, loss and injury likely to be caused to the plaintiff due to non-grant of temporary injunction.
The court said there is no prima facie case of disparagement or infringement of trademark made out by the plaintiff in its favour and against the defendants.
"The impugned advertisement is in the context of a game of cricket, a game of sportsmanship, which, in the opinion of this court, does not call for interference of any sort at this stage, especially while this court is considering the present application...
"More so, since in a case like the present one, interference by this court, at this stage, would tantamount to allowing the plaintiff to run on water with assurances of their not falling," Justice Banerjee said.
The court said there is nothing underlying in the advertisement which can trigger or motivate any members of the general public, much less any of the players/ viewers/ followers of any of the RCB or SRH cricket teams at this stage.
"There can be no one-sided impression or one-sided version of the impugned advertisement, particularly, since what according to the plaintiff is ‘right’ can according to the defendants be ‘wrong’, and vice versa.
"The act(s) of disparagement cannot be concluded on the basis of the reviews/ comments/ statements made by few viewers/ followers as there are always two sides of a coin. In any event, the same cannot form or be the benchmark for determining the act of disparagement and/ or infringement... This is not a telltale," the court said.
Earlier, describing the video advertisement, RCB's counsel said the cricketer could be seen running towards Bengaluru cricket stadium with an aim to vandalise the signage of "Bengaluru Vs Hyderabad", takes a spray paint and writes "Royally Challenged" before Bengaluru making it "Royally Challenged Bengaluru" which disparages RCB's mark.
The lawyer contended that when a negative comment is made, there is disparagement and added that Uber Moto, being the commercial sponsor of Sunrisers Hyderabad IPL team, while promoting its product of booking a ride, used RCB's trademark in the course of its trade, that too its "deceptive variant", which was impermissible under law.
The counsel representing Uber said RCB had "severely discounted" the sense of humour of the public at large.
Uber's counsel said good humour, sense of fun and banter are intrinsic to advertising messaging and these factors "will be killed" if such a standard, as mooted by RCB, is applied.
The advertisement, by then, had garnered 1.3 million views and a number of comments from users on the social media platform.
