“Operation Sindoor” Faces Trademark Tug-of-War Across Three Nations Amid Public Backlash

The codename "Operation Sindoor," linked to India's May 2025 military strike against terror camps in Pakistan, has become the subject of multiple trademark applications filing across India, the US, and the UK. This unexpected move has sparked widespread public backlash and ignited debate over the ethics of commercialising a term tied to national security and sacrifice.

Trademarking a Military Operation?

In an unusual intersection of intellectual property and national defense, the codename "Operation Sindoor"—assigned to India's recent military offensive against terror camps in Pakistan—has emerged as the subject of multiple trademark applications across India, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Operation Sindoor trademark application filing is observed in multiple countries like India, UK, and US till today.

Originally coined for a retaliatory military strike on May 7, 2025, the term has quickly gained symbolic resonance and public visibility. But what has followed is a surprising scramble by private individuals and corporations to secure exclusive commercial rights to the name.

The situation has raised eyebrows, sparked public outrage, and ignited a debate over the ethical limits of trademark law, especially when it intersects with national security and public sentiment.

Timeline of Events: The Military Strike Behind the Name

On May 7, 2025, India carried out a high-precision military operation targeting multiple terror camps across the Line of Control (LoC) in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). Named Operation Sindoor, the mission was India’s response to the Pahalgam terror attacks that claimed 26 lives—primarily Indian men, including army personnel and civilians.

India’s military stated that the operation successfully neutralized over 100 terrorists and destroyed at least nine high-value terror camps. 'Sindoor', a term deeply entrenched in Indian culture as a mark of marital status for Hindu women, was symbolically chosen. It was perceived as a tribute to the widows of the Pahalgam attack victims, adding a layer of emotional gravitas to the mission.

The Trademark Race: Who Filed and Where?

According to reports from Bar and Bench, at least 14 trademark applications have been filed in India alone by mid-May 2025. These applications span a wide array of commercial categories—from apparel and media content to telecommunications and educational services.

One of the most prominent initial applicants was Jio Studios, a subsidiary of Reliance Industries. The company’s application created a significant public uproar, forcing it to withdraw the submission within 24 hours. The studio later clarified that the move was unauthorized and was made by a junior employee. The retraction statement emphasized that the company had no intention of commercializing the name.

“This was an inadvertent filing by a junior team member without internal authorization. We have withdrawn the application and regret the oversight,” Jio Studios stated.

However, Jio Studios was not the only applicant. At least 13 other individuals and entities, whose identities are yet to be publicly disclosed, also made trademark claims. These applicants aim to use the name across sectors such as clothing, film production, online content, advertising, and training services.

United States Application

In the United States, a trademark application was filed by Rohith Baharani, a New York-based individual, on May 9, 2025. Filed on an "Intent to Use" (ITU) basis, the application is currently pending examination by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) under Classes 100, 101, and 107. These classifications cover certification and service marks, hinting at potential use in consultancy, verification, or other service-based domains.

United Kingdom Application

Simultaneously, in the United Kingdom, Vikas Mahajan, a resident of Devon, England, submitted a trademark application on May 8, 2025, to the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO). His application covered Classes 35 (advertising), 38 (telecommunications), and 41 (education and training services), indicating a possible plan to use the brand for content creation, online education, or media ventures.

Public and Political Reactions: Outrage and Ethics

The trademark applications have triggered strong backlash, both online and from political circles. Social media platforms, particularly X (formerly Twitter), have become a hotbed for criticism.

“This isn’t branding, it’s blatant mockery... It’s disturbing to see something so serious being reduced to a joke,” posted a user, Archana Pawar.

Prominent voices in the media and political realm have questioned whether codenames related to military operations—especially those commemorating national sacrifice—should be allowed to enter the realm of commerce. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi called it a "crime" to "inform Pakistan about the operation or to attempt to capitalize on it."

The BJP has responded by urging restraint, asking the opposition to "wait for the operation to conclude" before making judgments or political statements.

Legal Framework: Can a Military Codename Be Trademarked?

Surprisingly, under current Indian law, military codenames are not automatically protected under any special Intellectual Property framework.

The Ministry of Defence does not typically register or enforce rights over operation names, leaving them vulnerable to commercial claims unless specific legislation or administrative action is taken. This is unlike some other jurisdictions, such as the U.S., where military entities sometimes reserve names to prevent unauthorized usage.

The Trade Marks Act, 1999, however, does empower the Indian Trademark Registry to reject applications that are:

• Deceptive or misleading
• Contrary to morality or public order
• Likely to cause confusion

Therefore, while technically possible, such applications may face legal hurdles during examination if found offensive or insensitive.

Territoriality of Trademarks: Madrid Protocol and International Jurisdiction

India, the US, and the UK are all signatories to the Madrid Protocol, a treaty that allows trademark holders in one country to seek protection in other member nations through a single international application.

However, trademark rights are still territorial in nature. A trademark registered in the U.S. or the UK does not automatically grant rights in India. Hence, those aiming for global control over the “Operation Sindoor” mark would need to file in each jurisdiction—or designate those countries under the Madrid System.

Ethical Dilemma: Commercialisation of Sacrifice?

The controversy surrounding “Operation Sindoor” speaks to a broader ethical issue—should national tragedy or military valor be monetized?

The move to trademark a codename tied to an emotionally charged and strategically significant military operation has not only triggered legal scrutiny but also social debate about the limits of capitalism in patriotic contexts.

In an age of brand-driven economies, public sensitivity, national sentiment, and legal ambiguity form a volatile mix—one that this controversy has explosively brought to light.

A Name Too Sacred for Commerce?

As applications remain pending across India, the U.S., and the U.K., the ultimate fate of the "Operation Sindoor" trademark lies in the hands of legal examiners. Yet, the public has already cast its judgment, questioning the morality of turning national defense into a marketing asset.

Whether or not any of the applications succeed, this incident could act as a precedent, prompting legal reform or administrative policy to protect symbols of national pride from being commercialized.