Dupe Culture and Digital Deception: Legal Challenges of Trade Mark Dilution in Influencer-Driven Comparative Advertising

The article is about how ‘dupe culture’ evolves, with cheap items being sold as dupes or cheaper versions of higher brands, mostly by influencer comparative advertising within fashion, cosmetics, and lifestyle verticals. While such advertising appears to work in favor of the price conscious consumer, it does so at the cost of dilution of the brand identity of an established mark posing grave trade mark law concerns. The paper looks into how much digital marketing, especially through influencer advertisements, sets the stage for dilution and subliminal confusion amongst the consumers. Further, it looks into whether Indian trade mark law, especially Sections 29(2)(b) and 29(8) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, is well placed to face these challenges and the possible defences under Section 30(2)(a) for honest comparative references. The tension between brand protection and competition in the marketplace has impacted certain areas of law where grey zones exist due to influencer hyper marketing and algorithmic targeting. Analysing this from a comparative perspective means analysing Indian statutory safeguards and emerging judicial trends vis-a-vis frameworks in the U.S., E.U., and accepted best practices globally, such as the FTC Endorsement Guidelines and the ASCI advertising code. Landmark judgments in L’Oreal v. Bellure and Gucci v. Guess are critically analysed and stand alongside Indian scenarios of influencer promotion for lookalike products. Re-considering the dilution of trade marks in the digital world is encouraged, along with recommendations on policy change such as tighter disclosure laws and charging of intermediaries for overseeing deceptive comparative advertising. It speaks to intellectual property scholarship by trying to tackle the rapidly evolving interface between trade mark law, consumer behaviour, and ethics in digital advertising as regards dupe culture.