On August 29, 2025, Taiwan’s IP Office (“TIPO”) ruled partially in favor of Chanel, cancelling part of the designated services under the contested trademark “康朋cambon” after finding that the trademark may create confusion with Chanel’s brand “CAMBON” (Reg. No. 01790566, see below).
In its determination on August 29, 2025, TIPO only granted part of Chanel’s request, considering not the entire service categories designated by “康朋cambon” were similar to those by Chanel’s “CAMBON”:
1. TIPO first addressed Chanel’s request based on Article 30.1.10 of the Trademark Act, which provides that a mark shall be cancelled if such a mark is similar or identical to another’s earlier registered trademark, designated for use in identical or similar goods or services, and hence may create confusion among the relevant consumers.
2. On similarity, both trademarks contain the same English letters, i.e., “CAMBON” and “cambon”, with minor variations in terms of the letter case and font size. Ordinary consumers may find them visually, verbally, and conceptually similar.
3. On similarity of the designated services, TIPO noted that Chanel’s “CAMBON” covered products such as soup, perfume, essential oil, and cosmetics, and agreed with Chanel that these product categories were related to services designated by the contested trademark, such as retail and wholesale of cosmetics, online shopping, department stores, and television shopping. However, TIPO found that other services covered by the contested trademark, such as public relations, marketing, targeted marketing, vending machine rentals, etc., were dissimilar and unrelated to Chanel’s product categories.
4. As such, considering that Chanel’s “CAMBON” is highly distinctive, that there is similarity between the two trademarks, and that part of the designated services of the contested trademark were related to Chanel’s product category, TIPO concluded that those service categories shall be cancelled to avoid confusion with Chanel’s “CAMBON” brand. As to those service categories that were considered dissimilar or unrelated to Chanel’s products, TIPO found that the contested trademark would not create confusion among the relevant consumers. Chanel’s request to cancel the contested trademark based on Article 30.1.10 was therefore partially granted.
5. Although Chanel contended that “CAMBON” has become well-known and shall enjoy broader exclusivity, TIPO found evidence submitted by Chanel insufficient to support the alleged well-known status. The supporting materials, according to TIPO, were either not properly dated, did not show “CAMBON”, or reflected trademark use in other territories, which could not prove that the brand had established strong recognition in the local market. Hence, Chanel’s request to cancel “康朋cambon” based on Article 30.1.11 was denied.
沒有留言:
張貼留言