Procter & Gamble v. Committee was split trademark

found a clothing company’s trademark is the P & G , in order to produce the country’s reputation shampoo Procter & Gamble that their trademark has been infringed, so hence the court will appoint a trademark.
told reporters today, a Court ruling that the P & G is not well-known trademarks belonging to and therefore can not enjoy the legal cross-border protection of the treatment.
1998 years on July 27, Shantou will be a P & G, as used in clothing, and other goods on the trademark registration application.
in the notice period, the State Trademark Office received in the United States raised objections to P & G, Procter & Gamble that the company’s P & G trademark in 1994 was registered in China, owns more than 300 brands, Piaorou , COVERGIRL Chinese Trademark Office has been identified as a well-known trademarks, Shantou companies registered trademark of the same will lead to consumer confusion as infringing activities.
2001 years on June 14, the State Trademark Office approved the registration of a company in Shantou, P & G word as a trademark application. Subsequently, P & G to the Trademark Office’s approval to conduct a review committee to apply for trademarks. Trade mark ruling that the commission, only the existing evidence, can not be identified, P & G constitutes trademark has been well-known trademarks.
and major Procter & Gamble products covered by the detergent, cosmetic products, skin care and hair care products, food, medicines, paper products and other fields, Shantou is the only company to use the trademark in the field of apparel goods, the two belong to different sectors Not easily lead to consumer confusion, the use of the trademark does not violate the rights of Procter & Gamble.
trademark of Procter & Gamble will then appoint the court hence, to withdraw award.
court after that, in accordance with the Trademark Law , P & G is not enough to constitute a well-known marks, it will not be able to enjoy the law can be cross-border to protect the treatment and therefore dismissed the claims of Procter & Gamble, To maintain the trademarks of the commission findings.
the legal basis for the decision
Trademark Law Article 14 provides that well-known trademarks should consider the following factors:
related to the public to know the extent of the trade mark; the duration of the use of trademarks; the trademarks of publicity of any duration, degree of And the geographical scope; as a well-known trademarks protected records.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.