In a trademark opposition filed by Interparfums Suisse SARL (“Interparfums”), Taiwan’s IP Office (“TIPO”) ruled in Interparfums’ favor and cancelled the contested trademark “LannVann”, finding such trademark confusingly similar to Interparfums’ famous perfume brand “LANVIN” (Reg. No. 00837664, see below).
1. Article 30.1.10 of Trademark Act provides that a mark shall not be registered if such a mark is identical or similar to another’s registered trademark, designated for use in identical or similar products or services, and hence likely to cause confusion among the relevant consumers.
2. Here, TIPO noted that Interparfums’ “LANVIN” trademark demonstrated strong distinctiveness. Although “LANVIN” is also the name of the brand’s founder, Jeanne Lanvin, it is not related to the nature or function of the designated products. Further, by combining the word “LANVIN” and the drawing of a woman and a child, as a whole, TIPO considered consumers would still perceive “LANVIN” as the identifier of source of goods or services.
3. On similarity, while Interparfums’ cited trademark further included the drawing of a woman and a child, TIPO still deemed “LANVIN” as the dominant portion of the trademark. Given that both “LANVIN” and “LannVann” shared similar initial letters and overall structure and sequence, TIPO found there was verbal and visual similarity between the two trademarks.
4. As to similarity of designated products, TIPO noted that “LANVIN” was also designated for use in products like soap, perfume, essential oil, and cosmetics. These products are related to personal hygiene and beauty, which overlap with the product categories of the contested “LannVann”. Hence, TIPO determined that both trademarks cover similar products.
5. In view of the similarity between the two trademarks, the strength of “LANVIN” brand, and the overlap of product categories, TIPO concluded that the registration of “LannVann” may create confusion with the famous “LANVIN” brand. The contested trademark was cancelled accordingly.
沒有留言:
張貼留言