BVLGARI Seeks Court Support for Trademark

发布时间: 2018/11/21 10:48:00


  BULGARI S.P.A, holder of the famous designer brand BVLGARI, filed an administrative complaint to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court, seeking reversal of a decision denying territorial extension of protection in China of BVLGARI (No.G1290822) made by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) of the former State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC). The IP court heard the case recently.

  In 2003, BULGARI S.P.A applied for No.3811212 trademark in China, which would later be approved to be used on Class 14 goods such as jewelry and watches. In March 2016, SAIC’s Trademark Office (TMO) rejected the company’s application for territorial extension of protection for No.G1290822 trademark "BVLGARI" on Class 9 goods in China.

  TMO held that No.G1290822 trademark "BVLGARI" had constituted similarity with No.11695192 trademark "宝格丽BVLGARI"  filed by Shaoxing Wanshida Network Equipment Co.,Ltd. in 2012 and No.13690198 trademark "BVLGARI GEM ESSENCE" by Zhang in 2013. On this ground, TMO denied the application of BULGARI S.P.A.

  The disgruntled BULGARI S.P.A then pled the TRABreexamination. During the reexamination process,  No.11695192 trademark "宝格丽BVLGARI" was declared invalid.

  TRAB made a ruling that No.G1290822 trademark "BVLGARI" requesting to be used on instruments for recording, transmitting, processing, storing and exchanging data, sounds or images and other commodities constituted similarity with No.13690198 trademark "BVLGARI GEM ESSENCE" and would cause confusion and misrecognition among the public. On this ground, TRAB denied the registration application. In integrated circuit commodities, the designated goods are not the same and will not lead to confusion and misunderstanding, thus approved for registration.

  BULGARI S.P.A then brought the case to the IP court. In the recent hearing, Tong Yanyan, a lawyer from Beijing Conrad Law Firm representing BULGARI S.P.A., claimed that, No. 3811212 trademark of the company had been widely known to the Chinese public. The company wished that the court stay the case pending the resolution of the invalidation of No.13690198 trademark "BVLGARI GEM ESSENCE" case.

  TRAB insisted that its ruling was made in accordance with the law and that No. 13690198 trademark "BVLGARI GEM ESSENCE" was still valid, and that No.G1290822 "BVLGARI" should not receive the extended protection in China for the two trademarks constituted similar marks on similar goods.

  The court did not make a judgment after hearing. We will follow the developments of the case.  (by Zhu Wenming)


  (Editor Shao Jingjing)

  (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