The Delhi High Court has taken notice of a copyright infringement case filed against the BCCI by the publishers of Champak, a beloved children’s magazine that has been in publication since 1968. The dispute centers around the name “Champak,” which the BCCI used for a robotic dog introduced during the IPL 2025 season, sparking legal action over alleged trademark violation.
The robotic dog, which debuted during the Mumbai Indians vs Delhi Capitals match at the Arun Jaitley Stadium in early April, quickly became a talking point among fans. Created by international tech firms wTVision and Omnicam, the robot is capable of walking, running, jumping, and even balancing on its hind legs. Its quirky movements and advanced AI drew attention, but it’s the name—Champak—that landed the BCCI in legal trouble.
Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Pvt. Ltd., which owns the rights to the Champak trademark, contends that the cricket board used their registered name without seeking permission. According to the petition, the use of Champak in a high-profile commercial league like the IPL amounts to unauthorised trademark usage, potentially damaging the magazine’s brand identity and reputation.
ALSO READ: Oscar Piastri Applauds Teen Prodigy Vaibhav Suryavanshi After Record-Breaking IPL Hundred
Advocate Amit Gupta, representing Delhi Press, told the court that the robot was officially named Champak on April 23, following a fan voting campaign. He argued that the name, closely associated with animal characters in the magazine, was being commercially exploited in a context far removed from its original purpose.
Champak Magazine files trademark infringement suit before Delhi High Court against BCCI over naming of IPL’s AI robot dog as “Champak.”
Justice Saurabh Banerjee issues notice on interim injunction application. pic.twitter.com/QKEmPmcvb8
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) April 30, 2025
However, the court dismissed a related objection over the name “Chiku,” long linked with cricketer Virat Kohli. The judge noted that while the publisher may have known about the widespread use of “Chiku,” no previous legal steps had been taken. “You knew about it but didn’t initiate any action,” the judge remarked.
Gupta defended his client’s position, stating that even if the robotic dog is a different kind of product, the name’s usage risks brand dilution. “My magazine is known for animal characters. This causes confusion and detriment to the brand,” he said.
ALSO READ: Shaun Pollock Calls Out Delhi Capitals’ Top-Order Inconsistency Amid IPL 2025 Struggles
Yet, the court responded by saying there was no concrete evidence presented showing damage or dilution. On the matter of commercial exploitation, Gupta emphasized that while Kohli hasn’t used “Chiku” for commercial products, the IPL is clearly a profit-making venture. “If Kohli were to launch a product named Chiku, that would open grounds for commercial exploitation. But here, the IPL has already done that with Champak,” he said.
As the court deliberates further, the case opens a broader discussion on intellectual property rights and name usage in sports marketing.
