“INFINITI” Secures Trademark in China

文章来源: CHINA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY NEWS
发布时间: 2017/7/20 10:47:00

  The Trademark Review and Adjudication Board TRAB under the State Administration of Industry and Commerce of China SAIC recently decided to approve the application for trademark registration of services under review applied by INFINITI a famous brand of luxury car owned by  Nissan Motor.

 

  Nissan Motor filed an application No.12821630 for the registration of trademark for INFINITI requesting  in June 2013, certified to be used in Class 41 category with a total of 33 goods including rental of gaming devices, entertainment and organizing education.

 

  The Trademark Office TMO under SAIC decided that 32 designated use services of INFINITI hereinafter referred as services under review), excluding rental of gaming devices, constituted a similar trademark used in one or similar services with the No.12015377 全线传媒INFINITEMEDIA and Figure M trademark.  Therefore, TMO approved the application of INFINITI for trademark registration in rental of gaming devices and denied registration of services under review.

 

  The 全线传媒INFINITEMEDIA and Figure M trademark was filed by Shanghai Infinite Advertising Media Co., Ltd. in January 2013 and would be approved for use in Class 41 of goods including organizing cultural oreducational exhibition and entertainment in March 2015.

 

  In September 2014, Nissan Motor filed an application to TRAB for reexamination.  After being rejected, Nissan Motor then filed an administrative lawsuit to Beijing IP Court.

 

  The Court held that the INFINITI trademark and the 全线传媒INFINITEMEDIA and Figure M trademark are different in certain aspects including pronunciation and meaning.  Therefore, the two trademarks are not similar.  Accordingly, the Court revoked the TRAB decision and remanded the case to TRAB.

 

  The disgruntled TRAB brought the case to Beijing High  Court.  The Court held that the INFINITI trademark in the services under review and 全线传媒INFINITEMEDIA and Figure M trademark are basically the same in target customers, service methods, service channels, making them sharing the same or similar services.

 

  Meanwhile, the Court held that there are significant differences between INFINITI trademark and 全线传媒INFINITEMEDIA and Figure M trademark in the meaning of the characters, pronunciation, design style, and overall visual effects. Given that, the two trademarks are not similar trademarks in the same or similar services.

 

  In this connection, Beijing High Court declined the TRAB complaint and upheld the first-instance decision .

 

  Following the High Court decision, TRAB approved registration of INFINITI in the services under review.  by Wang Guohao

 

Editor Che Xingming

 

          All contents of this newspaper may not be reproduced or used without express permission

 

主办单位:中国知识产权报社 未经许可不得复制
ICP备案编号:京ICP备08103642号-2