20.02.2008
Posted in Trademarks, China, Japan at 10:56 am by TMSJ
The Chinese Trademark Office (CTMO) has refused the application for the trademark registration of “Aomori” (written in kanji characters) for fruit and several other categories of products.
The prefecture of Aomori is the northernmost prefecture on the Japanese island of Honshu and is famous for its agricultural products, apples in particular.
After learning that a Chinese company filed an application for the trademark Aomori in 2002, the Aomori prefectural government — together with 23 industrial groups of the prefecture — filed a complaint against it. The prefectural government was afraid that a registration of the trademark Aomori would lead to a ban of agricultural products from Aomori which, not only in Japan, are highly respected and recognized.
The CTMO refused the registration arguing that names of places which are commonly known in China cannot be registered as a trademark.
Source: Yomiuri Shimbun
Permalink
14.11.2007
Posted in Trademarks, Courts and Cases, China at 22:00 pm by TMSJ
There has been a surprinsing development in the lawsuit filed by Wahaha Food Co. (a joint venture formed by the French dairy maker Danone and the Chinese Hangzhou Wahaha Group) against the Chinese Trade Mark Office (CTMO):
A spokesman of Ogilvy & Mather, a public relations company representing Groupe Danone SA in China, told Shanghai Daily last week that the joint venture group has withdrawn the lawsuit against the CTMO. “During the legal process, we believe the facts around the written reply from the state trademark office have been clarified”.
Earlier on, it had been reported by Chinese media that Danone had had no choice than to drop the case against the CTMO as they seemed to have missed a filing deadline.
The MIP reports, however — under references close to the litigation — that the case was dropped because the Joint Venture Group had already obtained its main objective, namely a formal confirmation by the CTMO that Wahaha had not even attempted to transfer the trademarks in question to the Danone Joint Venture Group — which would be a serious breach of the joint venture agreement.
Permalink
