 |
|
|
|
|
Kim v. Disney Enterprises, Inc., 98 Hu 1914
March 23, 2001, published on March 15, 2001
On March 23, 2001, the Supreme Court has rendered its view on the definition of the interested person who can request a trademark cancellation trial and the scope of the interested person when the action involves a famous mark.
The Supreme Court reiterated the long standing view of the interested person as a person who would be injured from the registered trademark unless it is cancelled because such a registered trademark would cause this person not be able to use his or her mark, thus, being directly injured. Furthermore, this person would be entitled to seek a cancellation trial only if this person's goods are same or similar to the goods of the registered trademark subject to cancellation (Trademark Law, Article 66).
As to the scope of interested person involving a famous mark, the Supreme Court held that although the owner of the famous mark can seek a cancellation trial against a registered trademark with goods that are similar as well as dissimilar pursuant to Trademark Law, Article 7, Section 1(10) states that as long as the registered trademark would cause confusion as to the origination of goods, the owner of a non-famous mark cannot seek a cancellation trial against a registered famous trademark where goods are dissimilar from the goods of famous mark. Therefore, the Supreme Court clarified that Trademark Law Article 7, Section 1(10) applicable to famous marks cannot be reverse applied by the owner of a non-famous mark against a famous mark.
|
|
 |
|
|
