On
December 30, 2024, Taiwan’s IP Office (“TIPO”) sided with Abercrombie in an opposition
proceeding, finding the contested no. 02317287 trademark could cause confusion
with the apparel brand’s iconic trademarks (no. 00452329, no. 00455927, no.00456086,
no. 01291483, no. 01291484, no. 01994842, and no. 02075003, see below).
The contested trademark (no. 02317287, see below), was filed on December 8, 2022, and was granted on September 1, 2023, designated for use in goods under class 25, including clothes, sportwear, children’s clothing, headscarves, hats, socks, gloves, shoes, sweaters, jackets, etc. Abercrombie filed opposition on November 27, 2023, citing violations of Articles 30.1.10, 30.1.11, and 30.1.12 of Trademark Act.
TIPO
ruled in Abercrombie’s favor based on Article 30.1.10:
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.
TIPO
noted that the contested trademark features the combination of text and a drawing
of deer. As to the deer, TIPO posited that the contour, positioning, color, and
the eye-catching antlers bear similarity with Abercrombie’s moose logo. As to
the text “Absoluteam & Faith”, TIPO found it visually and verbally similar to
“ABERCROMBIE & FITCH” in that both start with “Ab”, and demonstrate similar
structure and sequence of English letters. TIPO concluded that ordinary local
consumers may overlook the minor differences, such as “Faith” v. “Fitch”, and find
both trademarks similar with each other.
3.
As
to the designated products, TIPO took the position that the contested trademark
is applied for use in similar apparel products, since Abercrombie’s trademarks are
also designated for use in jackets, socks, scarves, shirts, suits, etc. As such,
the designated products of the contested trademark overlap with those of Abercrombie’s
trademarks.
4.
Further,
to prove consumers’ recognition and familiarity, Abercrombie submitted evidence
including the sales records, webpages of its official website and IG, local news
reports, and the advertising materials of its local physical stores, which TIPO
found persuasive and supportive. In contrast, there is little evidence to show
the actual use of the contested trademark. Given the high distinctiveness and
the continuous use and marketing, TIPO found Abercrombie’s trademarks more
recognizable than the contested trademark.
5.
In
light of the visual and verbal similarity between Abercrombie's and the contested trademarks, the overlap of the designated
products, the high distinctiveness and familiarity of “ABERCROMBIE & FITCH”
in the local market, TIPO concluded that registration of the contested
trademark may cause confusion with Abercrombie’s trademarks among the relevant
consumers. As such, the contested trademark was canceled by TIPO accordingly.
沒有留言:
張貼留言