• 발명특허
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.34-39
• /
• 2011

• 발명특허
• /
• v.23 no.6 s.267
• /
• pp.37-43
• /
• 1998

• 발명특허
• /
• v.8 no.12 s.94
• /
• pp.8-14
• /
• 1983

• 발명특허
• /
• v.14 no.7 s.161
• /
• pp.12-13
• /
• 1989

'상표$\cdot$의장제도의 국제화 추세에 부응하고 현대화된 법령으로서의 정비를 위하여 특허법과 같이 상표$\cdot$의장제도 또한 그 정비가 필요하다고 봅니다.'

• 발명특허
• /
• v.34 no.10
• /
• pp.58-63
• /
• 2009

• 발명특허
• /
• v.13 no.2 s.144
• /
• pp.27-27
• /
• 1988

• 발명특허
• /
• v.7 no.12 s.82
• /
• pp.11-17
• /
• 1982

특허청에서 특허협력조약(PCT) 가입에 대비하여 추진하던 공업소유권 4법 개정법률안이 82년 11월 2일 국회의 의결을 거쳐 82년 11월 29일 법률 제3566호(특허법중 개정법률) 법률 제3567호(실용신안법중 개정법률), 법률 제3568호(의장법중 개정법률)로 공포되었다. 개정법률의 특징은 처음의 개정법률안에서 특허법 97조의2, 실용신안법 25조의2, 의장법 41조의2, 상표법 43조의2를 신설하여 심사관이 무효심판을 청구하는 경우에 무효사유가

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.157-176
• /
• 2016

This study is to investigate Trademark Prior Use Defence of prior use party under Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China. Chinese Trademark Law was amended for the third time and this Law shall enter into force on 1 May 2014. This third amendment introduced Prior Use Defence Right of Trademark for the first time. Article 59(3) gives the right to the prior use party for the continuous use of such trademark under the condition that first, an identical or similar trademark has been used in connection with the same goods or similar goods by others before the registrant's application, second, such trademark should have a certain influence in certain market, and third, such aforesaid trademark should be used within the original scope continuously. Then the exclusive right holder of said registered trademark shall have no right to prohibit others from continuous use of such trademark. Korean companies should be aware that it is almost impossible to search prior use trademark before a dispute arises, since the prior use trademark has never been registered. The best way to control the prior use trademark is to superintend aforesaid trademark for the use within the original scope.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.69
• /
• pp.699-720
• /
• 2016

In the past 10 years, there have been lots of misuses of the trademark system in China. For example, some Chinese companies have registered same or similar oversea's well-known trademark as a prior rights holder, and oversea's companies lost a chance to register their own trademarks or commence cases to acquire their own trademark determination in China. So Chinese government revised Chinese Trademark Law in 2014 to remedy these mistakes. Article 30 is intended to crack down on preemptive registration and compensate for the possible unfair consequences resulted from the principle of prior registration. Under the principle of prior registration, only where the unregistered trademarks of prior use have certain influence, and where the applicant of latter applied trademark knows or should know the prior trademark and the applicant has the bad faith of obtaining unjustified interests from goodwill of such unregistered marks, it shall be curbed by Article 30. Furthermore, trademark oppositions could be filed by anybody previously. Under the revised Trademark Law Article 44, oppositions based on absolute grounds can still be filed by anyone, but oppositions based on other available grounds can only be filed by a prior rights holder or a materially-interested party with undefined but similar to the standing requirement for filing nullities under Article 41 of the old law, and likely intended to cover trademark licensees and successors.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.14 no.9
• /
• pp.89-97
• /
• 2016

Intellectual property rights play a key role in employment creation and income generation plays an important role, especially in the creative economy. Many companies are ultimately increasing efforts to boost the company's financial performance, such as maximizing profits by building a strong brand assets amid committed to brand management in this paradigm. Reasonable evaluation and commercialization of technology transactions, financial assistance, investment decisions, trademark brand value for the reactivation (revitalizing) for the purposes of M & A, litigation, brand strategy will be said to be very important. In spite of the importance, the awareness of the property and the capabilities to assess are hardly sufficient. Thus, this study, targeting companies with valid trademarks for value assessment, conducted case analysis by cost method and income approach; the analysis presented the result from 2.05 million by the cost method to 2.7 million by the income approach applied to a variable discount rate and adjustment contribution. However, now that the implication was drawn from a single company, further studies covering case study and application plan according to scale and type of diverse company groups should be continued.