한국식품산업협회, 中 모조품 대응을 통한 지식재산권 수호에 나서다 한국식품산업협회(회장 이효율, 이하 ‘협회’)는 식품산업계 선도기업인 ㈜삼양식품, CJ제일제당㈜, 대상㈜, ㈜오뚜기와 함께 K-food 모조품 근절을 위한 공동협의체를 구성, 중국 최대 K-food 모조품 생산ㆍ유통기업인 청도태양초식품 등을 상대로 IP(지식재산권) 소송을 제기했다.○ 지금까지 각 개별기업이 중국 현지에서 모조품 및 위조품에 대한 행정단속을 시도한 적은 있었으나, 공동으로 상표권 등 침해소송을 진행하는 것은 이번이 첫 사례이다. 이번 소송은 효율적인 추진을 위해 특허청 및 한국지식재산보호원의 협조를 받아 진행되었다.
To date, most Western brands have focused primarily on the U.S. and the European Union, filing for a mix of classes of goods/services to cover their largely-prospective metaverse activities, namely class 9 (“downloadable virtual goods”); 35 (“retail store services featuring virtual goods”); and 41 (“entertainment services, namely, providing on-line, non-downloadable [goods] … for use in virtual environments”). But also, 42 in some cases (“non-downloadable computer software” and “non-fungible tokens”), and in a small number of cases, 25 (including “virtual clothing” alongside the traditional physical apparel that falls in this class of goods).
Dr. Martens, for instance, filed applications in classes 9 and 35 for its name and logo with the EUIPO last month. Tommy Hilfiger has filed applications with the same trademark office for marks like Tommyverse and Tommy World in the EU in classes 9, 25, 35, 41, and 42. Cosmetics and beauty companies like L’Oreal, NYX, Maybelline, Skinceuticals, and MAC, among others, have filed applications in a number of these classes in the EUIPO. And Allbirds lodged an international application with the World Intellectual Property Office in November after filing in the U.S.
China’s National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) released the Guidelines for Trademark Examination and Trial (商标审查审理指南) on November 22, 2021, effective January 1, 2022. The Guidelines, which are somewhat analogous to the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure, explains the Trademark Law’s Article 4, which states, in part, “malicious trademark registration applications that are not intended for use shall be rejected” by providing 10 factors to identify malicious applications.
China introduced the unique subclass system for assessing the similarity of goods/services during trademark examination. While the “check-box” approach is designed for efficiency, it leaves no room for a close case-by-case analysis.This stands in stark contrast to the process in many other countries, where the similarity of goods/services is typically assessed in a more flexible and detailed fashion allowing applicants to rebut the examiner and provide supporting evidence if needed.