When a business begins, people recognize it by its product or its name. When that product enters a convenience store, many shoppers may initially ignore it. But then the journey begins—a journey of advertising that catches consumers’ eyes. They try it, like the taste, and make repeat purchases. Some even recommend it to friends and family. Eventually, customers remember the name and repeatedly ask for the product.
Through years of investment in marketing and customer loyalty, a product’s name becomes more than just a word. It becomes a memory, synonymous with its category.
One such brand name recently had quite a journey in Nepal. Nepal’s Supreme Court delivered a landmark decision cancelling the trademark registration of “Perfect Center Please,” a product name strikingly similar to “Center Fruit,” a brand globally known among loyal customers for its taste, shape and distinctive advertising.
This story is about more than just a Supreme Court judgment, acts, bylaws or decisions made by the Department of Industry. It is about how brand identity is valued and why brand names must be protected from predatory market behaviour.
A factory, warehouses, delivery trucks and machinery are a company’s tangible assets. However, customers do not see these physical assets; they remember the brand name. After years of sustained investment, that name transforms into a business’s most precious intangible asset. In many ways, companies hide their true value in plain sight.
Related story
Nepali Politicians and the Politics of Morality
A product’s goodwill relies on immediate recognition—a state in which customers do not even need to read the full label to know what it is. This memory-based identity takes years of consistent effort to build. At its core, intellectual property (IP) law exists to protect this prestige, which, despite being intangible, represents a company’s single largest investment.
In Nepal today, there is a common misconception that IP protection is relevant only to multinational corporations (MNCs). This is a short-sighted perspective. As Nepal’s startup, manufacturing and tourism sectors grow, IP protection will become one of the biggest challenges facing local products.
To foster a truly competitive marketplace, the law must be applied equally to multinational corporations and domestic businesses. Being a local business should not grant immunity from copying or closely replicating an established MNC’s identity.
Markets need healthy competition, but competition requires boundaries. Any product can compete once it fulfils basic regulatory requirements. Genuine competition improves quality, taste and pricing while expanding the market. However, creating a product with a nearly identical name, sound, appearance or identity simply to deceive consumers and leech off a rival’s hard-earned brand equity is a different matter. In such cases, the fundamental question is whether a competitor is exploiting the goodwill established by an older brand.
Business shortcuts are always tempting. Building a new name, creating original packaging and earning shelf space alongside the market leader are massive challenges. Bad actors often choose to make their brand name, packaging and taste closely resemble those of the market leader so that consumers are easily fooled.
Yet shortcuts rarely lead to enduring success. Brands built in the shadow of a competitor are invariably labelled as copycats and perceived as inferior to the original, even if their quality is decent. Their success will never truly feel like their own. Long-term growth will remain overshadowed by bad-faith decisions made early on, and they will lose any moral ground.
Registering a business, paying taxes and meeting basic legal standards represent a narrow definition of corporate responsibility. Truly responsible entrepreneurs develop their own products and forge distinct brand identities rather than resorting to identity theft. This mindset must take root across Nepal’s manufacturing sector and broader business ecosystem.
We frequently talk about taking Nepali brands global through startups, innovation and industrialisation. But a moral question remains: if we cannot protect the intellectual property of others at home, does our entrepreneurial spirit have the grit required to build and defend our own unique identities abroad?
Creating an original identity is expensive financially, emotionally and in terms of the decades required to build it. Copying is easy and cheap. But products that piggyback on the success of others are bound to fail as modern consumers increasingly align themselves with brands that invest in authentic identities. For Gen Z, every consumption decision tells a micro-story, and consumer identity is a direct reflection of the products people choose.
Failing to enforce IP laws also harms the broader economy. A robust IP system ensures that brands of all sizes remain secure, giving today’s small Nepali startups the protection they need to become tomorrow’s global superstars. Viewing legal protection as a tool meant only for foreign brands is an outdated mindset. IP protection serves every business with a unique identity and a commitment to fair competition.
In light of this Supreme Court ruling, the role of the Department of Industry (DOI) must also be examined. Regulatory bodies cannot act merely as “paper pushers”; they must recognise their role as vital institutions whose decisions carry long-lasting economic consequences. Companies invest immense resources, time and effort while dealing with market uncertainty for years. Asking the right questions early—such as whether a proposed name, sound, appearance, packaging or overall feel closely resembles that of an existing market leader—can mitigate the risk of copycat products reaching the market.
Businesses must also invest in legal due diligence to audit their brand names, packaging and commercial risks. Being forced to rebrand late in the game can trigger a fatal downward spiral for a product. The lesson here goes beyond legal compliance. From a business standpoint, long-term sustainability stems from an authentic identity. The time and capital invested in crafting that identity constitute the true value of a brand.
There is a common saying in marketing: a brand is what people remember long after they have encountered it. But to leave that lasting impression, companies must invest significantly. The rule is simple: build your own brand through distinctive naming, packaging, sound and design. Your product can defeat a Goliath only if your David is genuinely your own, not rented or stolen. Ultimately, a brand name is one of a company’s most unique and valuable investments. Customers will remember your name only if you invest enough to make it worth remembering.
The author is an advocate and looks after corporate affairs.