RCB, Uber India lock horns in court over ad featuring Travis Head

A cheeky ad campaign by Uber India has landed the company in legal trouble with IPL franchise Royal Challengers Bengaluru (RCB), which claims the promotion crosses the line from humour into trademark infringement, as per a report by Livemint. 

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday heard arguments from both parties after RCB alleged that Uber’s latest ad for its bike-taxi service, Uber Moto, makes unauthorised use of its brand identity. The franchise took issue with an online video titled “Baddies in Bengaluru”, released on April 5, featuring Sunrisers Hyderabad player and former RCB cricketer Travis Head. The campaign is set around the upcoming RCB vs SRH IPL fixture and aims to pitch Uber Moto as a way to beat Bengaluru traffic.

RCB's counsel argued that the ad unfairly mimics and distorts the team’s popular slogan “Ee Sala Cup Namde” and uses a variant of its official name—Royal Challengers Bengaluru—without consent. A scene depicting a character, portrayed by Head, spray-painting “Royal Challengers Bangalore” inside a stadium was flagged as a deliberate misrepresentation. “It’s a targeted attempt to dilute and mock the RCB identity,” the team submitted as reported by Livemint, stating that the franchise has received backlash from fans and has been subject to ridicule on social media as a result.

Uber’s legal team hit back, describing the ad as a satirical and playful campaign, not meant to offend but to entertain. They further clarified that the reference to “Hyderabadi” by Head’s character was a pun, not a provocation, and denied any malicious intent.

Rejecting claims of trademark infringement, Uber argued that the ad makes no direct use of registered trademarks and instead relies on generic references like “Bengaluru vs Hyderabad.” The counsel insisted the campaign was protected under the umbrella of commercial free speech and dismissed the lawsuit as “preposterous.”

After listening to both sides, Justice Saurabh Banerjee reserved judgment on RCB’s plea for an interim injunction. While refraining from commenting directly on the merits of the ad, the judge noted its open-ended nature, observing that while the advertisement itself may not be inherently problematic, the platform on which it is shared could influence how it is perceived.