中文/English

"TAMASHI" trademark for three years without revocation

2013-5-2 17:01| Announcer: admin

French company (our client) has filed a revocation application for Article 1457817 "TAMASHI" trademark on the grounds that the trademark has been applied for three consecutive years. Applicant is only one player invoice, no other evidence. The case was reviewed, the court first and second instance, the final victory. 
Plaintiff: a French company (our customers) 
Defendant: Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce 
The third person: a technology company in Shenzhen 
    Shenzhen, a technology company in April 1, 1999 in the 9th category "DVD player" and other goods submitted "TAMASHI" trademark (hereinafter referred to as "revoked trademark") of the application for registration, October 14, 2000 by the Trademark Office Approved registration, registration number is 1457817. A company commissioned by the company in China on November 26, 2003 to apply for a trademark for three consecutive years did not use the goods on the grounds of the application to the Trademark Office to revoke the application. 
March 3, 2005, approved by the Trademark Office, was revoked trademark transfer to a technology company in Shenzhen. 
    Shenzhen, a technology company within the prescribed period to the Trademark Office submitted a DVD player sales invoices. The Trademark Office has ruled that the evidence is valid and that the registration of the revoked trademark is maintained. 
    A company commissioned by a company in France to submit a review application to the judges, the main reason is that only a sales invoice can not prove that the respondent in the designated goods on the use of trademark law. 
    Business Judge made a decision on June 12, 2010, that a technology company in Shenzhen to submit a DVD player merchandise sales invoice effective, to maintain the application of the trademark in the "DVD player, audio equipment, electro-acoustic components, power amplifier" goods On the registration, revoked the registration of other goods. 
    I am the Secretary for a French company to the Beijing First Intermediate People 's Court to bring a lawsuit. The reason is that only one of the original sales invoices associated with the player is not valid evidence. If the trademark is actually used on the goods, there should be invoices, commodity pictures, product labels, instructions and so on to retain the relevant evidence. And only one invoice is not enough to be deemed to be a separate use of the trademark. In addition, the occasional symbolic use can not be found that the revocation of the trademark is given a goodwill, the use of the trademark law. 
    A court in the trial that the mark 1457817 trademark in the three years involved in the use of the main evidence is a DVD player sales invoices. In view of the fact that the plaintiff did not endorse the authenticity of the invoice, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board and a technology company in Shenzhen did not provide any other evidence to substantiate the authenticity of the invoice. Therefore, the Commercial Committee found that the invoice could prove that the trademark No. 1457817 Year on the DVD player on the commercial use of the conclusions of the lack of basis, not support. The court ruled that the revocation of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce Trademark Review and Adjudication Board on June 12, 2010 issued by the letter [2010] No. 12455 on the No. 1457817 "TAMASHI" trademark revocation review decision and re- The decision to revoke the application for review of the trademark "TAMASHI" No. 1457817. 
    The defendant refused to accept the decision of Beijing Intermediate People's Court, appealed to the Beijing Higher People's Court, Beijing High Court after trial, to maintain the Beijing Intermediate People's Court of the decision. 
Case analysis: 
   The application of the provisions of Article 44 (4) of the Trademark Law shall meet the following requirements simultaneously: (1) The act of using the trademark by the trademark registrant belongs to the trademark use. 2, the use of the trademark must be true、 
The use of goodwill behavior, rather than the use of symbolic meaning. 
    Obviously, only a solitary certificate can not prove that the registered trademark in the designated goods on the trademark sense of the real sense of goodwill, and only the formation of a chain of evidence to prove that the use of goodwill behavior. In the case of the case, 
Shenzhen, a technology company if the use of the trademark player, at least there should be sales contracts, products or packaging photos, sales invoices and other evidence in order to form a valid evidence chain.
Address: 5/F, Tower A, GT International Center, Jia 3 Yongandongli, Jianguomenwai Ave, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022, China
Tel:+86-10-5879 3300Fax:+86-10-5879 3311Email: mail@boss-young.cn
返回顶部