Graphing a Fragrance: How India Opened the Door to Smell Trademarks

Firsts are something to always remember. This simple truth resonates deeply in the world of intellectual property, a realm traditionally dominated by the visual. But what happens when the next frontier of branding is invisible?

India’s Trade Marks Registry has just made history by accepting its firstever smell trademark: the distinct, roselike floral fragrance applied to tyres by Sumitomo Rubber Industries.

This unprecedented development signals a new era in intellectual property strategy, where sensory branding extends into the previously uncharted territory of scent. For legal practitioners, businesses, and innovators, the critical inquiry becomes: How will this progressive step redefine the intersection of product innovation and brand protection?

Sumitomo filed the application in March 2023 under Class 12 for tyres, on a “proposed to be used” basis. The Trade Marks Registry initially objected under Section 9(1)(a) for lack of distinctiveness and under Section 2(1)(zb), which defines a trademark as a sign capable of being represented graphically and capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one person from those of others. This requirement ensures that any mark—whether conventional or nontraditional—can be clearly, precisely, and objectively depicted so that third parties and enforcement authorities understand exactly what is protected. Representing a smell on paper, however, is inherently challenging, as olfactory marks do not lend themselves easily to traditional visual depiction. It was precisely this difficulty that made the Registry’s objection under Section 2(1)(zb) significant, compelling the applicant to devise a scientific graphical model that could translate the subjective perception of fragrance into a structured, reproducible representation. Representing a smell on paper is inherently challenging, as olfactory marks do not lend themselves easily to traditional visual depiction. To address this, scientific expertise was brought into play. Researchers from the Indian Institute of Information Technology (IIIT) Allahabad developed a sevendimensional graphical model mapping the fragrance across categories such as floral, fruity, woody, nutty, pungent, sweet, and minty. This framework transformed subjective sensory perception into a structured, reproducible visual matrix.

In its order dated November 21, 2025, the Registry held that this representation satisfied the requirements of clarity, precision, objectivity, durability, and graphical reproducibility under Section 2(1)(zb). On distinctiveness, the Registry concluded that the rose scent—bearing no natural association with tyres—was inherently capable of acting as a source identifier. By deviating from the typical smell of rubber, the fragrance could serve as a unique brand signal in the minds of consumers. The Controller General therefore directed that the mark be advertised under Section 20 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 as an “olfactory trademark,” accompanied by its scientific graphical representation.

Why Smell Marks Matter

Sensory branding drives emotional recall: Smell is uniquely tied to memory and emotion, making fragrance a powerful differentiator in crowded markets.
Legal and evidentiary challenges: Scents are difficult to describe, reproduce, and quantify. Registration requires robust evidence—continuous use, consumer perception studies, reproducibility documentation, and proof that the scent is not functional.
Commercial impact: A registered smell mark protects multisensory brand identity, deepening loyalty and elevating differentiation. Enforcement challenges—such as proving olfactory similarity or managing scent stability—can be addressed with scientific protocols, quality control, and consumer evidence.

WIPO Perspective: Global Context and Convergence

WIPO’s stance: Smell marks are nontraditional but viable, provided they are clear, precise, objective, durable, and reproducible.
Global precedent: Written descriptions or chemical formulas may suffice only if they meet strict criteria; functional or commonplace scents should not qualify.
India’s model: By applying a scientific matrix, India offers a pragmatic template that aligns with international principles while addressing local evidentiary realities.

Strategic Implications for Businesses

Innovation as Intellectual Property: Companies can now explore protecting broader sensory experiences—smells, textures, even tastes—as part of brand identity.
Building a Competitive Edge: A distinctive smell mark strengthens loyalty, enhances recall, and differentiates products in competitive markets.
Legal Preparedness: Enforcement will require robust monitoring, scientific documentation, and sophisticated legal strategies to defend protected scents.

The recognition of India’s first olfactory trademark is not merely a novelty—it is a strategic signal for all stakeholders in innovation and brand management.

Expand the IP Horizon: Move beyond logos and slogans; safeguard sensory elements as brand assets.
Invest in Distinctiveness: Innovation must create unique, protectable experiences.
FutureProof the Brand: Integrate IP strategy into product design from inception.
Balance Creativity with Compliance: Ensure sensory innovations are imaginative yet legally defensible and commercially viable

For enterprises, this development opens an entirely new frontier in sensory branding, enabling them to cultivate deeper emotional connections and distinctive market positioning. For policymakers and IP practitioners, it underscores the imperative of refining legal frameworks to meet the demands of modern commerce and innovation. For India’s broader innovation journey, it reflects visionary leadership—acknowledging that intellectual property protection must evolve to safeguard unconventional yet powerful signals of distinctiveness. Hence, this is not merely a legal first; it is a strategic leap forward, shaping the competitive edge of tomorrow in a marketplace where brands are no longer confined to being seen or heard, but can also be distinctly recognized through the sense of smell.

Darshi Mankad

Darshi leads the Trademark Opposition- Rectification Department. She has experience in handling clients spanning diverse sectors. She specializes in providing tactical advice on handling National trademark portfolios, includes trademark prosecution, opposition and cancellation proceedings before the Trademarks Registry in contentious matters, providing advice on brand adoption, protection, drafting and negotiating various contracts/Agreements. She has also drafted varied agreements including Franchise Agreement, Production Agreement, Brand usage Agreement and License and Service Agreement and so on. Darshi holds a combined Law and Business Administration degree and Masters in Business Law (Gold Medalists). Darshi has attended conferences including ‘Global IP Convention’, ‘Inventicon’ and Seminars by Gujarat Chamber of Commerce & Industry and have also spoken as a Guest Lecturer at Karnavati University, Gujarat National Law University, Silver Oak University, Pandit Deendayal Energy University- PDEU (Formerly PDPU).