The Principal District and Commercial Court in Belagavi has issued a second legal notice to San Francisco-based AI company Anthropic PBC, asking it to appear before the court on March 9 in the ongoing name dispute case.
Earlier, the court had sent a summons to the company’s headquarters in the United States, directing it to appear on February 16. However, no representative appeared on that date.
At that time, the US company did not have a registered office in India. Recently, Anthropic PBC completed its registration in India through the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) and set up its office in Domlur, Bengaluru under the name Anthropic India Pvt Ltd.
Following this development, Judge Manjunath Nayak has now ordered that the fresh summons be served to Irina Ghose, Managing Director of Anthropic India Pvt Ltd, at the company’s Bengaluru office.
Belagavi Firm Claims Prior Rights
The case has been filed by Anthropic Software Private Limited, a Belagavi-based company registered in 2017. The firm says it has been operating in the IT sector for over seven years and holds prior rights over the name “Anthropic” in India.
The Belagavi company has approached the court seeking protection of its name and brand identity. It has requested an ex parte injunction to stop the US-based company from offering services in India under the brand name “Anthropic.”
Speaking to The Times of India, Mohammad Ayyaz Mulla, Managing Director of the Belagavi firm, said they will continue pressing for an injunction if the US company fails to appear in court.
The Belagavi firm claims that the similarity in names has caused several problems, including:
- Loss of business opportunities
- Difficulty in attracting investment
- Online traffic meant for the local company being diverted
- Brand confusion among customers
The company works in AI-based educational products, holds patents related to driving safety solutions, and develops WiFi monetisation systems to provide affordable or free internet access.
The lawsuit is reportedly based on the legal principle of “passing off.” Under this rule, if a company has used a name continuously and earlier than another, it may get protection — especially if both companies operate in similar fields.
The matter will now be heard on March 9, when the court will expect a response from the Indian arm of Anthropic PBC.