• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.73
• /
• pp.1-20
• /
• 2017

There are many safeguards and measures available regulating the protection of a trademark and its registered holder, however, the protection of a licensee in a trademark license agreement is also important for protection of a intellectual property. Therefore, there are several measures in place for the protection of licensees' interests in Chinese trademark law. Article 43(3) of the Chinese Trademark Law rules a licensor who licenses others to use his registered trademark shall submit the trademark licensing to the trademark office for file, and the trademark office shall announce the trademark licensing to public. Without filing, the trademark licensing shall not be used against a bona fide third party. It means a licensee can not use an unrecorded license with the relevant trademark authority against third parties - essentially, this means that a licensee should insist on having their trademark license agreements recorded against the relevant trademark authority, so that a licensee's interests are protected as against the assignees, licensees and other types of third parties. Otherwise a third party in good faith can use the registered trademark legally against a licensee even though a trademark license agreement between a licensor and licensee is still valid.

• 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.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.15
• /
• pp.169-209
• /
• 2001

As a domain name can be registered simply by filing an application for registration, disputes over the domain name between the holder of domain name and the holder of trademark increased. Since the holder of trademark who was late for registering domain name is willing to pay for the return of domain name, cybersquatters increased. Cybersqatters are not genuine users of the Internet. This article is to compare the construction of law by American Courts and by Korean Courts and to assert the creation of the law similar to the law of US as to anti-cybersqatting. American Courts applied the Trademark Act and the Anti-Dilution Act to resolve the disputes over domain name. To apply the Trademark Act, the Court required the plaintiffs to prove that the goods or the services expressed by the domain name should be identical or similar to the goods or the services represented by the trademark. However, there were many cases where the holder of domain name used it for the goods or the services irrelevant to those of the holder of trademark. Also, the Anti-Dilution Act could not successfully protect the holder of trademark from cybersquatters because it required that the trademark should be famous or distinctive. As a result, the US promulgated a new law which is designed to prohibit cybersquatters from being free of sanction by the existing laws. Korea Courts applied the Trademark Act and the Unfair Competition Prohibition Act to the cases disputing domain name. Likewise in the US, Korean Courts must cope with the issue of identity of the goods or the services, and the famousness or distinctiveness of trademark. The Courts hesitate to give a winning judgement to the holder of trademark simply because the domain name of alleged violator confused the trademark. Some scholars advocate the broadening of construction of the Unfair Competition Prohibition Act to illegalize cybersquatting but it is beyond the meaning of the law. Accordingly, it is a time to make a law similar to the Anti-Cybersquatting Act of the US. The law must be a fair and reasonable compromise to resolve the collision between system of registration of domain name and the system of registration of trademark. Some commentators advocate that the registration of domain name should be examined just as the one of trademark and to facilitate it, the Patent and Trademark Office should have jurisdiction of registration of domain name. But it abandons the distinction of domain name and trademark and results in obstructing e-commerce. By adopting the Anti-Cybersqatting Act, we can prohibit it. In other cases, we get a reasonable adjustment between the holder of domain name and the holder of trademark through the Trademark Act and the Unfair Competition Prohibition Act.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.13
• /
• pp.1013-1032
• /
• 2000

At present, the scale of Electronic Commerce through internet has been rapidly increasing due to the development of information & communication technology, and aggregated to 2.4 billion dollar in America last year (1998). The market scale of worldwide electronic commerce is also presumed to be about 130 billion dollar in 2000, and to occupy more than 20% of the whole world trade in world 2020. Since the right of trademark, despite of being effective only in registered nations on the principle of territorialism, is unified on the cyber space of internet without domestic barrier or local limitation which make it easier to conduct the distribution of information rapidly through the address-internet domain name, those are very important that the systematic dispute-solving plan on problems such as decision of its Act and international jurisdiction to be established, in an effort to prevent the newly emerging dispute instances such as trademark infringement and improper competitiveness. In addition, it is natural that on the threshold of the electronic commerce age which formed with an unified area without the worldwide specific regulation, each country including us makes haste with the enactment of "electronic commerce Act" aiming at coming into force in 1999, in keeping with getting through "non-tariff law on electronic commerce" by U. S. parliament on May, 1998. In view of the properties of electronic commerce transactions through internet, there are the large curtailment of distributive channel, surmounting of restrictions on transaction area, space and time and the easy feedback with consumer and the cheap-required capital, from which the problems may arise - registration of trademark, the trademark infringement of domain name and the protection of prestigious trademark. Therefore, it is necessary to take the counter-measure, with a view of reviewing the infringement of trademark and domain name and the instances of each national precedent and to preventing the disputes. The improvement of the persistent system should be needed to propel the harmonious protection of those holding trademark right's credit and demanders' expectant profit by way of the righteous use of trademark.

• Journal of Platform Technology
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.16-23
• /
• 2020

For protecting copyright for trademark, convolutional neural network can be used to confirm genuine of trademark image. For this, repeated training one trademark image degrades the performance of machine learning because of overfitting problem. Therefore, this type of machine learning application generates training data in various way. But if genuine trademark image is rotated, this image is classified as not genuine trademark. In this paper, we propose the way for extending training data to confirm genuine of trademark image which is rotated. Our proposed way generates rotated image from genuine trademark image as training data. To show effectiveness of our proposed way, we use CNN machine learning model, and evaluate the accuracy with test image. From evaluation result, our way can be used to generate training data for machine learning application which confirms genuine of rotated trademark image.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.645-652
• /
• 2021

This paper analyzed the so-called 'Honey Butter Almond case', which became a hot topic by showing that the packaging design of a product can be distinguished as a recognizable trademark, not just a pattern. In the judgment, the issue was whether the discrimination power of the registered trademark and the similarity to the previously used trademark. First of all, with respect to the discrimination power of the registered trademark, the court said that the package front figure functions as an identification mark of the source, as long as the specificity of the expression method and overall composition are distinct from the commonly used. And the court said that it is difficult to say that the dominant impression is similar to the previously used trademark (the snack 'Honey Butter Chip') in terms of its name and idea. This case is acknowledging the function of the packaging design as a product label, and also acknowledging it can acquire identification as a distinctive trademark through the uniqueness of its composition and expression method.

• Management & Information Systems Review
• /
• v.38 no.3
• /
• pp.55-80
• /
• 2019

Recently, many companies improving their management performance by building a powerful brand value which is recognized for trademark rights. However, as growing up the size of online commerce market, the infringement of trademark rights is increasing. According to various studies and reports, cases of foreign and domestic companies infringing on their trademark rights are increased. As the manpower and the cost required for the protection of trademark are enormous, small and medium enterprises(SMEs) could not conduct preliminary investigations to protect their trademark rights. Besides, due to the trademark image search service does not exist, many domestic companies have a problem that investigating huge amounts of trademarks manually when conducting preliminary investigations to protect their rights of trademark. Therefore, we develop an intelligent similar trademark search model to reduce the manpower and cost for preliminary investigation. To measure the performance of the model which is developed in this study, test data selected by intellectual property experts was used, and the performance of ResNet V1 101 was the highest. The significance of this study is as follows. The experimental results empirically demonstrate that the image classification algorithm shows high performance not only object recognition but also image retrieval. Since the model that developed in this study was learned through actual trademark image data, it is expected that it can be applied in the real industrial environment.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.113-131
• /
• 2011

Recently, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) announced the expansion of the number of generic top-level domains (gTLDs) beyond the current 22 gTLDs, and the gTLD Applicant Guidebook for ICANN's new gTLD program is now under consideration for approval. ICANN also introduces a "Trademark Clearinghouse" and the "Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS)" procedure to protect trademarks and expedite dispute resolution and save costs. The Trademark Clearinghouse is a central repository for information to be authenticated, stored and disseminated, pertaining to the rights of the trademark holders. Trademark holders would voluntarily provide data of their trademarks from all over the world, and it would assist a trademark watch service provided by the new gTLD registry for trademark holders and potential domain name registrants. The URS is a part of the new gTLD dispute resolution mechanisms created by ICANN to resolve cybersquatting disputes. A complainant in a URS proceeding must establish three elements that are very similar to the existing UDRP to succeed, but supposedly more expedited and cost efficient. Since the URS provides that it only protects court validated and registered trademarks, it is not clear whether unregistered marks used in commerce are protected under the URS. The URS escalates the complainant's burden of proof from a preponderance of evidence standard under the UDRP to a clear and convincing evidence standard. The notices to a respondent shall be sufficient if the URS Provider sends the notice of Complaint to the addresses listed in the Whois contact information. As registrants who wish to conceal their true identity often subscribe to the privacy/proxy service and the complainant's high rate of success in the UDRP proceeding is relevant to the respondents' default rate, the URS's simple notice requirement would deprive respondents of a fair opportunity to assert their rights over the disputed domain names.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.12 no.10
• /
• pp.61-71
• /
• 2014

Global commerce is apparently here to bind Korean firms as well as Koreans. The advertising, buying and selling of goods and services recognizes no borders. As a result, enforcing territorially based trademark rights has become ever more challenging. Remote trademark owners who peacefully coexisted in a time before the internet and increasing globalism are now bumping heads. The internet also has made it easier for unscrupulous operators to deceive consumers and divert customers from established businesses by misappropriating trademarks on web-sites and in domain names. U.S. federal courts have been willing to help American businesses halt trademark infringements that reaches outside the United States. This is particularly true for e-business, via the internet, and the trend toward enforcement seems to be in favor of the trademark owner. This article discusses this trend as well as the extraterritorial enforcement of trademark rights by U.S. courts under the Lanham Act. It also offers suggestions for protecting valuable trademark rights worldwide. This paper will contribute to global Korean firms and Koreans who carefully read arguments in this valuable literature.