On January 27, 2021, Taiwan’s IP Office (“TIPO”) cancelled trademark “Gichancy” (Reg. No. 02001277, see below) after finding the registration of such trademark may cause confusion with the well-known luxury brand “GIVENCHY.”
The opposed trademark, “Gichancy”, was filed on December 24, 2018, by a cosmetic company based in China, designated for use in goods such as necklace, jewelry, watches, pearls, jewelry pendants, etc. The opposed trademark was granted on August 1, 2019. Givenchy SA filed opposition on October 31, 2019, contending that the registration of the opposed trademark may cause confusion with its famous trademark “GIVENCHY”, and that “Gichancy” should be cancelled in accordance with Article 30.1.11 of Trademark Act.
TIPO’s determination is based on the following:
1. Article 30.1.11 of Trademark provides that a mark shall not be registered if such a mark is similar with other’s well-known trademark so that there exists likelihood of confusion on the relevant public, or dilution of the distinctiveness or reputation of such well-known trademark.
2. With regard to the well-known status of “GIVENCHY”, after reviewing the submitted evidence, including the registration records of “GIVENCHY” trademark, advertising and marketing materials, media coverage, and sales records, TIPO was convinced that the French luxury brand has gained wide recognizability and become well-known in the field of apparel, footwear, handbag, perfume, and the relevant fashionable products.
3. With regard to similarity, TIPO found “Gichancy” and “GIVENCHY” both share the same letters “G”, “I”, “N”, “C”, and “Y”. Consumers with ordinary degree of care would find the overall appearance, structure, and pronunciation of “Gichancy” very similar with those of the famous trademark “GIVENCHY”.
4. TIPO further noted that although “GIVENCHY” may refer to a French name, consumers in Taiwan are not familiar with such word. Besides, other than Givenchy SA and its group, “GIVENCHY” is rarely used as a trademark. Thus, TIPO determined “GIVENCHY” trademark is unique and highly distinctive.
5. As discussed above, “GIVENCHY” as a trademark has become well-known in fashionable products like jewelry, apparel, handbag, and footwear. Similarly, TIPO found the products designated by “Gichancy”, such as necklace, earrings, pearls, watches, etc., are of similar nature or perform similar function. Therefore, TIPO determined the opposed trademark was applied for use in similar goods.
6. While the registrant of the opposed trademark argued that consumers in Taiwan will know how to distinguish “GIVENCHY” and “Gichancy” because “Gichancy” has been put in use and registered as trademarks in other countries, TIPO found there is little evidence submitted by the registrant to support its use of the opposed trademark in Taiwan. Thus, TIPO did not find registrant’s arguments persuasive.
Based on the above, “Gichancy” was cancelled in view of confusion with the famous “GIVENCHY” trademark.
Source:
沒有留言:
張貼留言