By Yang Hua  Ding Xianjie  and He Tongjun  King&Wood Mallesons’ Intellectual Property Group

untitleduntitled 01What should we concern: when determining the level of similarity between trademarks, it should be limited to comparing the part that the citation mark has acquired the right to exclusive use with the mark in application. The part that is disclaimed of the exclusive right to use in an early registration even if has distinctiveness should not constitute a valid part for comparison and impede registration of a later filed trademark.

“Disclaiming the right to exclusive use” in trademark application refers to the situation in which the proprietor makes a disclaimer to give up any right to exclusive use for a part of the trademark, in order to avoid rejection of the whole application due to registrability issue of the disclaimed part. Signs prohibited from registration due to lack of distinctiveness are the part that is more commonly disclaimed of the right to exclusive use. In practice, some proprietors also disclaim the right to exclusive use for a part that has distinctiveness (the Disclaimed Part), which gives rise to the issue referred above, whether the Disclaimed Part will function to impede the registration by others of a later filed application. Continue Reading Trademark comparing: disclaimed part no longer valid even with distinctiveness

By Ou Xiuping  Xu Jing Yin Ji  King&Wood Mallesons’ Intellectual Property Group

01The legal framework of service invention is stipulated by the PRC Patent Law and the Regulation on Protection of New Varieties of Plants. Also in April 2015, the State Council solicited public opinion of the Regulations on Service Invention (Draft), which has been amended for the fourth time[1]. This article will closely study and analyse hot-spot issues in PRC legal practice with respect to disputes over service invention on the case study, including: Continue Reading Invention for hire in PRC: what should practitioners know – I

By Yang Hua  Wang Fang  King&Wood Mallesons’ Intellectual Property Group

untitledWhat should we concern: registered trademark, filed in the name of others without others’ authorisation should be deemed as “obtained through means of fraud” and should be announced invalid.

DELTASOFA’S S.R.L. (“DELTASOFA”) was established on September 19, 1985 by Vincenzo Liborio Calia, a skilled master carpenter in Europe who in 1965 started to design and produce sofas in south Italy and created the famous sofa brand “caliaitalia”. Nowadays the “caliaitalia” sofa products are sold in countries in North America, the Middle East and the Far East.

On August 1 2008, a Guangdong company filed a trademark application for the mark “caliaitalia” under No. 6875537 (hereinafter as “mark in dispute”) in the name of “Calia Italia S.p.A” (the former name of DELTASOFA”). In 2011, this Guandong company, again in the name of “Calia Italia S.p.A.”, signed the trademark assignment documents regarding the mark in dispute and had the mark assigned to its affiliated company. Continue Reading Trademark invalid: registering in others’ name with no authorisation

By Yang Hua  Wang Fang  King&Wood Mallesons’ Intellectual Property Group

untitledWhat should we concern: prior copyright shall be regarded as a prior right being protected in China; a registered mark, which is substantively similar to the other’s prior copyrighted work, shall be announced invalid on the basis of copyright infringement.

“THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN” (French: “LES ADVENTURES DE TINTIN”) is a world famous series of comic albums created by the Belgian cartoonist HERGE. After HERGE passing away, all the rights in association with this work have been assigned to and managed by Moulinsart which was established under the HERGE Foundation.  Since “THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN” entered into China in 1988, this series work has gained immense popularity among the Chinese readers.  In China, Moulinsart has applied for and registered several marks for “TINTIN” and “TINTIN & Device” (drawing of this mark is listed below) in respect of various goods and services in classes 9, 16, 25, 28 and 41. The images of the boy and the dog with the bone as shown in the “TINTIN & Device” mark are the leading character “TINTIN” and his friend “Snowy” in the “THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN”. Continue Reading Registered trademark invalid based on prior copyright infringement

作者:欧修平 徐静 尹吉 金杜律师事务所知识产权

01我国《专利法》、《植物新品种保护条例》等法律法规已经建立起了职务发明的基本制度,但是在实践操作中仍存在大量的问题,法院在司法审判中也出现了标准不一的情况。而2015年4月国务院法制办就《职务发明条例草案(送审稿)》公开征求意见[1]。本文拟结合立法与司法,对职务发明奖励报酬纠纷中的相关问题进行分析研究,其中包括:

  • 奖励报酬制度适用的主体和条件;
  • 约定优先原则的理解与适用;
  • 奖励报酬数额的确定;及
  • 诉讼时效问题。

囿于篇幅所限,我们先在本篇介绍奖励报酬制度适用的主体和条件。 Continue Reading 职务发明报酬纠纷之制度适用主体及条件

作者:陈长会 金杜律师事务所知识产权

untitled执行程序作为知识产权侵权诉讼的最后一环,对于有效保护权利人的利益至关重要。但是,与其他民事纠纷一样,执行难一直是困扰权利人的问题,导致权利人即使胜诉,赔偿也难于完全履行,甚至根本得不到履行。因此,如何避免赢了官司拿不到钱是需要权利人和律师重视的棘手问题。

一、国内执行现状:

民事执行是实现债权人权利的重要手段,也是法制国家的重要指标[1]。执行难问题一直是困扰我国法治建设的关键难题之一。 Continue Reading 知识产权侵权诉讼执行问题浅析

作者:杨华 王芳 金杜律师事务所知识产权

untitled焦点:未经他人同意而自行以他人的名义申请注册商标,属于《商标法》第四十四条第一款“以欺骗手段取得注册”的情形,商标应予以无效宣告。

德尔塔沙发有限公司(DELTASOFA’ S.R.L.)于1985年9月19日成立,其创始人卡利亚·利博里奥·文森佐(Vincenzo Liborio Calia)为欧洲沙发制造巨匠,于1965年开始在意大利南部创作和生产自己设计的沙发,并创立了“caliaitalia”沙发品牌,如今,caliaitalia沙发产品远销北美、中东和远东地区,是意大利家居行业的一张名片。

2008年8月1日,广东某公司擅自冒用“卡利亚家具股份有限公司”(Calia Italia S.p.A.)名义提交了第6875537号“caliaitalia”商标(下称“争议商标”)。2011年,广东某公司再次冒用“卡利亚家具股份有限公司”(Calia Italia S.p.A.)名义签署了关于争议商标的转让文件,将此件商标转让给其关联公司。 Continue Reading 擅自以他人名义申请商标可宣告无效

作者:杨华 王芳 金杜律师事务所知识产权组

untitled焦点:在先著作权属于应当受到保护的在先权利,以与他人在先美术作品实质近似的标识申请注册商标,有可能构成对他人在先著作权的侵犯而被宣告无效。

《丁丁历险记》(法文:LES ADVENTURES DE TINTIN;英文:THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN)由比利时漫画家HERGE(埃尔热)先生创作,是世界知名漫画作品。埃尔热去世之后,所有涉及该部作品的权利统一由埃尔热基金会下设的穆林萨特公司管理。1988年,《丁丁历险记》连环画走入中国,在中国享有巨大的读者群体,深受家长和孩子们的喜爱。穆林萨特公司在中国9、16、25、28和41等多个类别上申请注册有多件“TINTIN”系列商标,其中包括“TINTIN及图”商标,见附图一,其中的图形部分分别是《丁丁历险记》中的主人公“丁丁”和丁丁的宠物狗“白雪”。 Continue Reading 商标可能因侵犯在先著作权而被宣告无效

作者:杨华 丁宪杰 何佟俊 金杜律师事务所知识产权

untitleduntitled 01焦点:商标近似比对时,应限于将引证商标享有专用权的部分与申请商标进行比对。在先商标中放弃专用权的部分,即便具有显著性,也不是有效比对部分,不能阻碍在后商标注册。

“放弃专用权”是指在商标注册申请中,商标申请人声明放弃申请商标中某些部分的专用权,以避免因该部分所存在的注册性问题而导致整个商标被驳回。比较常见的放弃专用权部分是那些缺乏显著性的禁注标志,然而,实践中也有申请人放弃具有显著性部分专用权的情况,由此引发出被在先商标权人放弃专用权、却具有显著性的部分,能否阻碍他人之后就这部分获得商标注册的问题。 Continue Reading 在先商标中被放弃专用权部分不能构成他人的注册阻碍

By Stuart Fuller  Paul Schroder, King & Wood Mallesons’ s Sydney Office

fuller_sschroder_pToday the China Australia Free Trade Agreement (ChAFTA) was signed and tabled in the Australian Parliament following a decade of negotiations and seven months of document review and finalisation. Good things come to those who wait (and persevere). This historic milestone will boost trade and economic growth in both countries for years to come.

The formal agreement and ancillary arrangements are consistent with the summary material released by DFAT in November. The key issues are now well-traversed: investment protections and facilitation, reduction or removal of tariffs, and increased access for services businesses. We’re excited about this historic next chapter in the Australia-China relationship and we think you should be too. We’ve spent the past seven months thinking about and engaging with our clients on what this means for them. We set out below some headline thoughts on where the biggest opportunities are.

Read full article, please click here.

Continue Reading ChAFTA is here – are you ready?