If
you like camping, and happen to be a fan for camper van, you probably already
heard of Volkswagen’s updated “Volkswagen California 6.1”. Indeed, VW’s Volkswagen
California 6.1 is attractive, catchy, and equipped with everything you need for
a great camping experience, including a touch-screen panel for controlling the pop-up
roof, an auxiliary diesel-powered heater, cabin lighting, a refrigerator, and
some fancy gadgets. Undoubtedly, VW wants to make sure this is the go-to car for
the campers around the world.
However, it turns out that VW may want more than just to make its car dreamy.
To make sure its camper van could be the most unique and distinguishable
product in the market, in December 21, 2018, VOLKSWAGEN AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT (hereafter
“Applicant”) filed trademark application for “6.1” (Application No. 107082633, see
below) in Taiwan. In January 15, 2020, Taiwan’s Intellectual Property Office
(“IPO”) said “No.”
The reasons held by IPO are that:
1. Article 29.1.3 of
Taiwan’s Trademark Law provides that a trademark shall not be registered if
such mark consists exclusively of signs which are devoid of any
distinctiveness. According to IPO’s Guideline for Determining Trademark’s
Distinctiveness, pure number, in principle, shall not be distinctive. It is
because based on the common usage, number is used to describe the year (e.g.,
wine), the size (e.g., shoes), the volume (e.g., sheets of tissue paper), the
speed (e.g., the memory card), or the power (e.g., engine) of a product, and is
less likely to be conceived as the source of goods or service.
2. Here, upon reviewing the
material of trademark use submitted by the Applicant, the mark “6.1” is used in
combination with the brand name “Volkswagen” and the model name “California”.
As such, when seeing “Volkswagen California 6.1” in its entirety, ordinary
consumers are more inclined to view “Volkswagen”, instead of “6.1”, as the mark
to identify the source of goods.
3. Although the Applicant
argued that it is rare for automaker to use number with decimal point to
describe the product, the IPO found it unpersuasive. In the submitted material,
the IPO found the Applicant used number like “T6” and “T6.1” to identify the different
versions of its updated vehicles, rather than the source of product supplier.
Hence, IPO considered Applicant’s mark “6.1” not distinctive, and is simply used
to describe the “version” of Applicant’s upgraded vehicle.
4. The Applicant further
argued that the mark has acquired distinctiveness through its continuous use
and wide media coverage. Nevertheless, the IPO found no relevant evidence, such
as survey data, advertising documents, sales records, etc., showing the sole use
of “6.1” by the Applicant is sufficient to create distinctiveness among the
relevant consumers. Therefore, the IPO ruled the trademark application for “6.1”
should be denied.
It remains to be seen if VW will contest
such decision, and whether there will be more evidence submitted to support
VW’s arguments regarding acquired distinctiveness.
沒有留言:
張貼留言