Some Decisions From Different Countries About Intellectual Property Law
I.B.8. Likelyhood of Confusion
On June 6, 2000, applicant filed to register the trademark HODA (in Persian script) for goods in Classes 12 and 35. Honda Giken Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha filed an administration opposition before the Iranian Industrial Property Office ("IIPO") claiming prior registration for the trademark HONDA in Iran. The IIPO referred the matter to the public court of Tehran.
The Court issued a verdict in favor of Honda. Even though the application fot HODA was filed in Persian script, the pronunciation was similar to English trademark registered by Honda. Therefore, the Court found that the general public would be confused and ordered cancellation of the HODA application.
Publication of Tehran No.69, Case No.669/3/79, Verdict No.94, Date: April 25, 2001
The petitioner was the publisher of a well-established magazine in the orthodox community named FAMILY. The respondent was the publisher of a new magazine named GOOD FAMILY, intended to be distrubuted in the orthodox community as well. The petitioner filed a lawsuit on the ground of passing off and asked the Supreme Court prevent the respondent from using the name GOOD FAMILY. The Court ruled that the tort of passing off applies only at the occurrence of two combined conditions: one's product or service must have acquired goodwill and there must be a reasonable suspicion of misleading the public. The Court held that none of these conditions applied in this case. The name FAMILY was descriptive, and since it had not acquired secondary meaning, it was not entitled to protection under the tort of passing off. As for the second condition, Israeli Courts tend to reject publishers' claims based on similarity of the magazine title alone. This attitude is based on the assumption that people develop loyalty to a specific newspaper and, therefore, would not make mistakes even if te titles are similar.
CA 5792/99 Religious Communication and Education v. S.B.C. et al., Supreme Court 2001.
The respondent, an assets management company, owned an Israeli registration for the service mark CAPITAL. The petitioner applied for the cancellation of the respondent's service mark before the Trademark Registrar found that the word CAPITAL was a descriptive word commonly used in the respondent's field of business. The respondent claimed that the mark CAPITAL had acquired secondary meaning through extensice use. The Trademark Registrar rejected this argument on the ground that use of the mark had been made by the respodent's affiliated companies but not by the respondent itself. The Trademark Registrar held that use of a mark by affiliated companies without a registered licence by the owner of the trademark could not benefit the owner of the mark.
Capital Online Ltd v. V.S.P. Capital Property Management Ltd., Patent and Trademark Registrar, October 30, 2001
Thank you for your contribution to our knowledge on Trademark.
may the word "extencise" that is used sentence below be "extensive"
the mark CAPITAL had acquired secondary meaning through extensice use
|Şu anda Bu Konuyu Okuyan Ziyaretçiler : 1 (0 Site Üyesi ve 1 konuk)|
|Konu Araçları||Konu İçinde Arama|
|Konu||Konuyu Başlatan||Forum||Yanıt||Son Mesaj|
|Property Deeds||Konuk||Turkish Law||6||14-11-2007 00:16|
|property question||Konuk||Turkish Law||3||15-08-2007 11:34|
|The Constitutions of Some European Countries||Doç. Dr. Özge Yücel||Hukuk Ingilizcesi Çalışma Grubu (Legal English TEAM)||0||17-06-2007 22:26|
|Help with Property||Zippy||Turkish Law||1||23-06-2006 17:07|
|New Property Law||Zeytin||Turkish Law||0||27-11-2004 10:26|
|Türk Hukuk Sitesi (1997 - 2016) © Sitenin Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Kurallar, yararlanma şartları, site sözleşmesi ve çekinceler için buraya tıklayınız. Site içeriği izinsiz başka site ya da medyalarda yayınlanamaz. Türk Hukuk Sitesi, ağır çalışma şartları içinde büyük bir mesleki mücadele veren ve en zor koşullar altında dahi "Adalet" savaşından yılmayan Türk Hukukçuları ile Hukukun üstünlüğü ilkesine inanan tüm Hukukseverlere adanmıştır. Sitemiz ticari kaygılardan uzak, ücretsiz bir sitedir ve her meslekten hukukçular tarafından hazırlanmakta ve yönetilmektedir.|