'America's Anthropic has hit our brand,' says Karnataka's own Anthropic

In a significant development in the global technology space, a Belagavi-based software company from Karnataka has initiated legal action against US-based artificial intelligence (AI) firm Anthropic over the use of an identical name. The dispute has now reached the courts, with the Commercial Court in Belagavi issuing a fresh summons to the American company.

The San Francisco-headquartered AI major recently opened its office in India, in Bengaluru, signalling its intent to make the city its Indian base. At this juncture, the Karnataka-based company has escalated the matter legally.

What is the dispute?

Belagavi-based ‘Anthropic Software Private Limited’ was established in 2017. In contrast, the US-based Anthropic — known for developing Claude AI to rival ChatGPT — was founded in 2021. However, both companies operate under the same name. Claiming prior use, the Belagavi firm’s owner has approached the court, asserting that the rights to the name should rest with them.

Also read: Sam Altman: What's happening in India with AI is really amazing

Speaking to The Federal Karnataka, company founder Mohammed Ayaz Mulla said, “We have been operating under the name ‘Anthropic’ since 2017, much before them. The entry of the US company into the market under the same name has affected our brand value and created confusion among customers.”

Expressing strong displeasure over the American company’s approach, he added that the dominance of the global tech giant is overshadowing their business. “We initially sent a notice to their headquarters in the US. Recently, after they opened an office in Bengaluru, we issued a notice there as well. However, we have received no response so far. Therefore, we have decided to seek an ex parte injunction from the court immediately,” he said.

Company with three patents

According to the founder, ‘Anthropic Softwares Private Limited’ has also achieved several technological milestones. “We have been in this industry for many years. Our company holds three patents — two related to driving safety technology and one for a Wi-Fi monitoring system. We have developed solutions such as ‘QuickTunes’ aimed at preventing road accidents. We have even received a cash award from the Karnataka government for our innovations. Despite such a track record, the late entry of the AI company is affecting our position in the market,” Mulla stated.

A question of survival

The Belagavi firm owns the domain anthropic.in. However, when anyone searches for ‘Anthropic’ online, it is the American company’s website (anthropic.com) that appears prominently. As a result, the local firm claims it has virtually become invisible online, severely impacting its customers and new business opportunities.

Also read: Sam Altman on awkward moment with Dario Amodei: 'I was confused'

The company has approached the court seeking recognition as the prior user of the name and demanding compensation of Rs 90 lakh (approximately 10,000 US dollars as mentioned in the petition) for the losses allegedly incurred.

Court proceedings

The Commercial Division of the District Court in Belagavi had earlier directed the American Anthropic to appear for the hearing. However, as the company’s representatives did not appear at the February 16 hearing, the matter has now been adjourned to March 9, and fresh summons have been issued.

What do legal experts say?

Speaking to The Federal Karnataka, commercial law expert Siri P. explained the possible legal course in such cases. “These matters are heard in commercial courts. Generally, in business-related disputes, companies that can establish prior existence tend to have an advantage. However, during the hearing, the court will also examine the spelling and pronunciation of the disputed name,” she said.

Also read: AI Summit: Have controversies dented India’s credibility? | Capital Beat

The court will consider supporting documents such as incorporation certificates, tax payment records and service agreements before delivering its judgment. She further noted that if a company fails to respond even after notice, there is scope for an ex parte injunction.

The case can be pursued up to the Commercial Court, the High Court and even the Supreme Court. At the trial court level, the matter could be resolved within six months. If the court allows the American company to continue operating upon payment of compensation, it will be bound to comply, Siri clarified.

Orders passed by Indian courts are enforceable only within India. For international enforcement, the matter would have to be pursued in Geneva, the expert added.

(This article was originally published in The Federal Karnataka.)