Abstract
The advent of generative artificial intelligence has fundamentally disrupted traditional assumptions embedded within intellectual property law, particularly in the domain of trademark protection. This paper examines the legal validity of AI-generated logos as registrable trademarks under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, situating the inquiry within broader comparative and jurisprudential frameworks. Through a close reading of the statute, it is established that the Act’s foundational requirements distinctiveness, graphical representability, and non-deception under Sections 2, 9, and 11 apply neutrally to AI-generated marks, imposing no authorship-based bar to registration. However, the ownership prerequisite under Section 18 necessitates a human or corporate applicant, given that AI systems hold no legal personality under Indian law. The paper further interrogates the copyright-trademark intersection, drawing on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak (2008) and the American decision in Thaler v. Perlmutter (2023) to assess the implications of absent human authorship for dual-layer brand protection. Relevant Indian Supreme Court precedents on distinctiveness and passing off are analysed alongside global positions adopted by the USPTO, EUIPO, and WIPO. The paper concludes that AI-generated logos are legally valid as trademarks, provided human ownership, prior clearance, and documentary evidence of creative control are firmly established.
Introduction
Artificial Intelligence (AI) can generate logo, slogans and other trademarks for the companies very quick and perfect with compared to human generated creations. In one prompt, it gives polished, structured and ready to use. The core legal issue arises is whether an AI generated logo can be protected and registered under Trade Marks Act, 1999. AI generated trademarks are not disqualified from trademark registration but it has to satisfy the standard requirements otherwise it will face a lot of problems, dispute of originality and rejections.
What makes a Trademark valid?
Section 2(1) (zb) of Trade Marks Act of 1999 defines Trademark as a mark capable of being represented graphically and which is capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of others and may include shape of goods, their packaging and combination of colours and section 2 (1) (m) defines mark to includes a device, brand, heading, label, ticket, name, signature, word, letter, numeral, shape of goods, packaging or combination of colours or any combination thereof. Therefore, AI should follow the trademarks rules, show clear distinctiveness and also avoid generic shapes, establish ownership and satisfy the standard requirements.
The Legal Concerns Surrounding AI-Generated Logos
Canva, Midjourney, LogoAI, Brandmark and other such AI tools generate millions of visual which causes similar designs and create confusion whereas human creation gives originality. The main legal issue with AI logos is originality, AI tools use large data base of images, outputs and abstract curves which subsequently repeats similar patterns and formats which can leads to repetition of similar trademarks. Secondly, ownership requirement is one of the main concerns. However, Trade Marks Act does not demand a human creator but it does demand a human owner. Section 18(1) of the Trade Mark Act requires that any person claiming to be the proprietor of a trademark may apply for its registration. The term “person,” read with the General Clauses Act, 1897, encompasses individuals and corporate entities but not AI systems. Thirdly, copyright overlapping, AI generated logos lacks human creative contribution so if may fall outside the copyright protection and enter the public domain as artwork. As the copyright and trademark are separate rights it does not prevent trademark registration but it narrows the scope of total protection.
Conditions for Registering AI-Created Logos as Trademarks
A design that looks generic or purely decorative does not qualify for protection. A trademark objection under Section 9 of the Trade Marks Act arises when a mark lacks distinctiveness or cannot identify one business from another. A logo may still be distinctive even if AI-generated, provided its composition, angles, lettering or arrangement creates a recognisable identity rather than a decorative pattern. The Registry expects the applicant to hold full commercial rights to the logo. If the AI platform keeps ownership or limits usage, the application becomes weak, and examiners often ask for licensing proof. Under Section 18 of the Trade Marks Act, only a person claiming to be the proprietor can apply. If the rights are unclear, the examiner may question whether the applicant qualifies. When ownership is uncertain, the trademark filing loses legal footing early in examination. Section 11 bars registration of marks that may confuse the public. Even slight resemblance to a registered or pending logo can lead to an objection, and AI-generated designs often fall into this category because many share similar shapes and layouts. For instance, if an AI tool produces an abstract S-curve that echoes a known telecom logo, the Registry may raise a Section 11 objection for likelihood of confusion. Such similarity can also lead to infringement concerns.
Conclusion
An AI-generated logo can be a valid trademark under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and its global equivalents. The law evaluates marks on their commercial function distinctiveness, source identification, and non-deception not on the identity of their creator. What the law insists upon is a human owner: someone who selects, adopts, and uses the mark in trade, and who bears legal accountability for its use. The machine may do the designing. But only a person can hold the trademark.
References
Trade Marks Act, No. 47 of 1999, India.
General Clauses Act, No. 10 of 1897, India.
Sapna Mane, Can You Trademark an AI-Generated Logo in India?, LegalWiz.in (Dec. 24, 2025), LegalWiz.in.