World
Cambodia named World Best Tourism Destination for 2016
The European Council on Tourism and Trade (ECTT) has named Cambodia as the World Best Tourism Destination for 2016.
 
Some 30 countries joined the competition for the illustrious award this year, an ECTT press release issued late Wednesday said, adding that Cambodia presented its report for the competition under the title 'Cambodia: The Land of Magic-The Place Where Gods And Kings Build the World!'.
 
Cambodia took the top spot in awards owing to its rich cultural and historical legacy and outstanding natural beauty.
 
"Cambodia is a perfectly safe and outstanding destination that will forever mark your heart," said Professor Anton Caragea, president of the Bucharest-headquartered ECTT, which consists of 28 European countries as members.
 
Cambodia is renowned for two cultural sites in the UNESCO's World Heritage List. One is the 12th century Angkor Archeological Park in Siem Reap province and the other is the 11th century Preah Vihear Temple in Preah Vihear province.
 
Besides, the Southeast Asian nation has many interesting eco-tourism sites, including a 450-km pristine coastline stretching across four provinces in the country's southwestern part.
 
The country attracted some 4.8 million foreign tourists in 2015, earning gross revenue of more than $3 billion, according to the Ministry of Tourism.
 
Pavel Avramoiu, director for Hotel Management and Evaluation at ECTT, said Cambodia has huge potential for tourism development.
 
"Cambodia, now proclaimed World Best Tourist Destination, must transform this perfect opportunity and universal limelight in a base for attracting investors in the field of hotels and hospitality to cater for the millions that will find their ways to the Kingdom of Wonders and Land of Magic," he said.
 
Last year's award winner was the African country of Ethiopia. 
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

User

Air India withdraws operation from Bengal's Durgapur Airport
Air India on Wednesday said it will withdraw its operations on the Kolkata-Durgapur-Delhi route from June 17 due to operational reasons.
 
The national air carrier was the sole airlines operating a flight from the newly built Kazi Nazrul Islam Airport in Durgapur (Andal) of West Bengal's Burdwan since December. Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee flew on its first trial flight from Durgapur to Delhi on December 7.
 
"Air India will withdraw its operations on the Kolkata-Durgapur-Delhi and return sector from June 17 due to operational reasons," said an airline spokesman.
 
With Air India stopping its flight, there will be no scheduled flights to and from the airport from Friday.
 
The spokesman said the passengers who booked tickets may either cancel and get the full refund or opt to fly Delhi from Kolkata with the same ticket.
 
The official declined to give the details of the operational reasons for which it suspended its operation. But it was learnt that the airlines withdrew its operations due to economic non-viability.
 
Bengal Aerotropolis Projects Limited (BAPL), which developed the greenfield airport, said the cost of operations or the viability gap funding would have been almost half in case of a private airline compared to that of Air India.
 
BAPL said while traditionally, VGF is paid by state governments to the airlines, it was the only private airport operator in the country to offer VGF to an airline to operate scheduled flights.
 
"To bring in the first carrier through the viability gap funding model was not because of a dearth of demand but because of non-availability of any historical data, which is a primary requirement for any private airline operator to reach a conclusion, in terms of assessing the market potential.
 
"Had it been any other private airline operator, the cost of operations/VGF would be almost half of what Air India has been charging. In that event, the operations would not only be self sustainable but highly profitable," said airport developer's Managing Director Partha Ghosh.
 
"The high cost of operations by Air India, makes even a lucrative market like the Durgapur-Asansol region, unsustainable," he added.
 
BAPL said it was in advanced level of talks with some of the major private airline operators to operate flights from Durgapur to all other major metros, starting with New Delhi and Mumbai.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

User

Identically Different or Dissimilarly Same?
What’s in a name? A rose by any other would smell as sweet. But when there are crores riding on it, a name can be a prized possession. And name calling, or hearing, can be the source of legal battles.
 
Normally, words found in the dictionary are not granted trademark status. The intention is to create words that are unique. Sometimes, with long usage, geographical exceptions are allowed. Champagne, the bubbly, is actually the name of a region in France. If one produces better stuff, more potent or tastier, it cannot be labelled after the area, unless the grapes are grown there. Kolahapuri chhapals must come from that town. As must Basmati rice from India, Darjeeling tea from the hills and Assamese brew from the neighbouring state; Scotch from the highlands.
Problems start when sight and taste are clubbed with acoustics. Can one market a car called Kadillac? Or Totapuri mangoes as Alfonso? Or Thai rice as Baasmati? The intent is clear. Misleading cannot be allowed, though one can sell Norton biscuits. Or Seiko shoes. No mistaken identity there.
 
LONDON DAIRY is the make of an ice cream. It sells in tubs, paper packs and cones. There are many varieties. Every type of container has a picture of an ice cream. The predominant colour is a dark blue or black. It has to be kept refrigerated but, obviously, posters hang out in the heat. It’s not priced like ice-golas. The company is incorporated in the Middle East.
 
LONDONDERRY is Parle’s brand for sweets. Foil packaging is predominantly red, pictures show small sweets. The product sells at two for a rupee. Parle is Mumbai-based.
 
LONDON DAIRY sued.
 
While it is impossible to go into the nuances of marks and their uses in a single column, these were the important points. For trademarks registration, a class is selected and then a product in that class. Both ice cream and sweets, food items, fall under Class 30. London Dairy specified ice cream; as it was all it sold. Likewise, Parle asked for boiled sweets. It may not be chalk and cheese but even the raw materials vary. One would melt in the mouth. The other would, well, melt. One sold world-wide. The other had humbler clientele. The only convergence seemed homophonic. 
 
You be the judge
 
Would you grant interim injunction against selling LONDONDERRY sweets?
 
The judge, at the very initial stage, conceded that such matters are subjective and only a judge can judge, as he feels right. There are not, and cannot be, measurable rules. He has to weigh the pros and cons and decide, as decide he must. He brought in our favourite theory of the reasonable man and put himself in the former’s shoes. The only question can then be this. Did Parle purposefully plan to deceive buyers of LONDON DAIRY into buying LONDONDERRY sweets? If yes, injunction needs be granted. If not, no action at notice of motion stage against Parle. 
 
Far-fetched, felt the judge of the objections raised by Dairy. No relief for now.
 
The matter is now going to trial. Would the defence stand the argument on its head and ask if LONDON DAIRY could sell 100-rupee ice creams to a person wanting to put a 50-paise sweet in his mouth? Will the plaintiff ask why Parle could not come up with another name? Londonberry, for instance? Will the contesting parties carry out surveys to determine if the public at large would, or would not, be misled? Can the complainant show loss? Can the defendant prove otherwise? Can phonetics be the sole criteria? Or should other distinguishing facets be brought in? Can one word and a split word be considered the same?
 
But, then, all three words are of common usage. London and Londonderry are names of cities. Dairy is an everyday term. Will that weigh? Or is it not sufficient? Should both marks be not granted?
 
The reasonable man all over again. Vive le difference! Or the lack of it!
 
NB. This article may appear in the Daily Times, NOT Delhi Times. 
 

User

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)