Apple Inc. prevailed in opposition for its “iCloud” trademark

On October 30, 2024, tech giant Apple Inc. (“Apple”) secured a victory from Taiwan’s IP Office (“TIPO”), persuading TIPO that the registration of no. 02360102 trademark should be canceled due to likelihood of confusion with Apple’s trademark “iCloud” (no. 01953374, see below).

The contested trademark, “SVICLOUD” (no. 02360102, see below), was filed by Hao You International Co. Ltd. (“HY”) on August 31, 2022, and granted on March 1, 2024, designated for use in goods under class 9, such as TV box, computer hardware, network router, internet equipment, communication equipment, audio and video selector, internet TV, set-top box. Apple filed opposition on May 31, 2024, alleging violations of Articles 30.1.10, 30.1.11, and 30.1.12 of Trademark Act.

TIPO ruled in Apple’s favor on October 30, 2024, based on Article 30.1.10 of Trademark Act:

1.    Article 30.1.10 of Trademark Act provides that a mark shall not be registered if such a mark is “identical with or similar to another person’s registered trademark or earlier filed trademark and to be applied for goods or services identical with or similar to those for which the registered trademark is protected or the earlier filed trademark is designated, and hence there exists a likelihood of confusion on relevant consumers”.

2.    In terms of similarity, TIPO found HY’s contested trademark features a combination of a small cloud (on the left side of the mark) and the word “SVICLOUD”. Such arrangement is visually, conceptually, and verbally similar with Apple’s “iCloud” trademark, which also features a combination a cloud and the word “iCloud”.

3.    As to the designated products, TIPO noted that Apple’s “iCloud” is applied for use in products like computers, computer hardware, software, mobile phone, smart wearables, sound and video player, etc. These products, in TIPO’s opinion, serve functions and purposes that are similar to those designated by HY’s “SVICLOUD” trademark. Their targeted customers, functions, and sales channels overlap with each other.

4.    Moreover, TIPO recognized that Apple’s “iCloud” is highly recognizable and distinctive among the relevant consumers.

In view of the above, considering the similarity between Apple’s “iCloud” and HY’s “SVICLOUD”, the overlap of designated products, and the distinctiveness of “iCloud” trademark, TIPO concludes that registration of HY’s trademark may raise confusion among the relevant consumers. Thus, the contested trademark “SVICLOUD” is canceled by TIPO accordingly.

Source: https://cloud.tipo.gov.tw/S282/OS0/OS0401_SCN3.jsp?issueNo=XpJ13RyT4dytXeWlnY1hMaDh4RFFLdEdwai95dz09&l6=zh_TW&isReadBulletinen_US=&isReadBulletinzh_TW=true