US firm Anthropic tells Karnataka court it lacks jurisdiction in trademark suit

American AI firm Anthropic PBC, which recently opened its office in Bengaluru, on Thursday told a civil court in Belagavi district hearing a trademark suit filed against it that the court lacks the jurisdiction to take up the case. The company urged the court to return the plea by Belagavi-based Anthropic Software to be presented before a competent court, as the startup does not carry on business or have a registered office in the district. In its application, the US firm has claimed that “As per Section 20 of the Civil Procedure Code, the plaintiff (Anthropic Software Pvt Ltd) herein can either file a suit for passing off at the place where the defendant company carries on business (i.e in the United States) or where the cause of action arises.”Additional District and Session Judge, hence, directed Mohammad Ayyaz A Mulla, director of the Belagavi firm, which has filed the trademark suit, to file its objection to the application. Mulla, in his trademark suit, stated that his firm, Anthropic Software, and Anthropic PBC both operate in the same technology industry, and alleged that the US company deliberately adopted and used an identical name to benefit from its goodwill, reputation and market recognition in India. He alleged that the US company has deliberately used a deceptively similar mark, causing confusion and unfair competition.

The US company stated that its mark, ‘Anthropic’, has acquired tremendous reputation, goodwill and trans-border reputation in India, and its goods and services have also acquired substantial goodwill and reputation in India. It pointed out that the Belgavi firm has been reportedly using the name ‘Anthropic’ since 2017, but has applied for its registration on October 18, 2025 — about 10-days after the US company made a public announcement of its entry into the Indian market. “This clearly vitiates its bona fides,” the US firm submitted. Anthropic PBC, in the application also submitted that a “Plaintiff’s belated application for registration of ‘Anthropic’ mark is nothing, but a mere afterthought aimed at frustrating the operations and create a barrier for defendant’s legitimate entry into Indian market and the instant is filed with a sole intention of harassing the defendant (US-based Anthropic) allegedly make wrongful gains at the cost and expense of the defendant.” ‘Allegations of confusion are illusory’Story continues below this ad Rejecting the allegations of the Belagavi startup that use of the ‘Anthropic’ mark by the defendant is ‘likely to cause damage, the US company argued that these allegations are entirely illusory and premised on mere apprehensions rather than demonstrable instances of actual confusion among the customers. “In any case, it is not the plaintiff’s case that the Defendant Company is rendering/marketing or providing its goods and services in Belagavi which may lead to confusion to its customers in Belagavi,” the plea stated. Mulla says he suffered business loss Mulla, in his trademark suit, has said he started his company in 2017, and it has been recognised as a startup by the Centre and the Karnataka Government under the Startup India Programme. He contended that the defendant’s use of the impugned mark is likely to damage and dilute his company’s goodwill and reputation, as third parties may erroneously associate the defendant’s services with those of his.Story continues below this ad It is also claimed that the US company’s name is being prominently suggested on AI-based platforms and standard Google search results in place of his firm’s name. As a consequence, his company’s name has been completely removed or di