CHINA REPORT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
 
|
HOT POINT
|
|
|
|
 
Kung Fu Panda gets merchandising right
“功夫熊猫”获商品化权保护
Author:CopyFrom:hits:1637UpdateTime:2015/10/29 11:52:57Editor:

Recently, Dream Works Animation SKG filed a dissent application against a “KUNGFUPANDA” trademark application applied on car seat covers filed by a Shandong nature person Hu Xiaozhong. After the trademark above approved by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) under the State Administration of Industry and Commerce of China, Dream Works filed a administrative law suit to Beijing NO.1 Intermediate People’s Court. Recently, Beijing Higher People’s Court made the final judgment of the case, overruling the verdict made by TRAB and the judgment made by Beijing NO.1 Intermediate People’s Court, and required a new verdict from TRAB.
    Accordingly, Hu Xiaozhong filed the application of No. 6806482 “KUNGFUPANDA” trademark in December 2008, applied from Class 12 merchandise of car seat covers. In the statutory period, Dream Works filed a dissent application against the trademark application above to the Trademark Office under the State Administration of Industry and Commerce of China and was then rejected. Dream Works then filed a reexamine application to TRAB.
    Dream Works claimed that, the trademark was similar to its citing trademark on same or similar merchandise, and violated its merchandising right.
    The Citing No. 5400891 “KUNGFUPANDA” trademark, ratified use of Class 9 merchandise of computer peripheral equipments, and No. 5400892 “KUNGFUPANDA”, ratified use of Class 28 merchandise of toys,  are registrated by Dream Works from June 2006.
    After that, Dream Works appealed to Beijing Higher People’s Court. Dream Works claimed that, its famous film “KUNG FU PANDA” had already had a popularity in China before the “KUNGFUPANDA” trademark application filed, thus it should have the merchandising right of the film, which would be violated by the “KUNGFUPANDA” trademark application.
    The Court held that, the film “KUNG FU PANDA” and the characters in the film had already had popularity in China before the “KUNGFUPANDA” trademark application filed, and were created by Dream Works. So the Court held that the merchandising right of “KUNGFUPANDA” should be protected. (by Mao Liguo)
  本报讯 此前,美国梦工场动画影片公司(下称梦工场公司)针对山东省自然人胡晓中申请注册的“KUNGFUPANDA”商标提出异议。在中国国家工商行政管理总局商标评审委员会(下称商评委)裁定被异议商标予以核准注册后,梦工场公司向北京市第一中级人民法院提起行政诉讼。日前,北京市高级人民法院对该案作出终审判决,撤销了一审原判及商评委被诉裁定,并要求商评委重新作出裁定。
  据了解,涉案的第6806482 号“KUNGFUPANDA”商标,由胡晓中于2008年12月提出注册申请,指定使用在第12类方向盘罩、车辆座套等商品上。法定期限内,梦工场公司针对被异议商标向国家工商行政管理总局商标局提出异议申请,但未获支持。随后其向商评委申请复审。
  梦工场公司称,被异议商标不仅与其在先申请注册的引证商标构成使用在同一种或类似商品上的近似商标,而且还侵犯了其在先商品化权。
  据了解,梦工场公司拥有的第5400891号“KUNGFUPANDA”商标,核定使用在第9类计算机外围设备等商品上;拥有的第5400892号“KUNGFUPANDA”商标,核定使用在第28类活动玩偶玩具等商品上。两者的申请注册时间均为2006年6月。
  此后,梦工场公司向北京市高级人民法院提起上诉称,其制作的《功夫熊猫KUNGFUPANDA》电影已于被异议商标申请注册日前,在中国进行了广泛宣传并进行了公映,已具有一定知名度,该知名电影名称已蕴含了较高的商业价值和较多的商业机会,应当作为民事权益予以保护。被异议商标的注册和使用将损害梦工场公司享有的在先商品化权。
  二审法院经审理认为,在被异议商标申请注册日前,梦工场公司出品的影片《功夫熊猫KUNGFUPANDA》及其中人物形象的名称在我国具有较高知名度。而且,该知名度的取得是梦工场公司创造性劳动的结晶。因此,“功夫熊猫KUNGFUPANDA”作为在先知名的电影名称及其中的人物形象名称,应当作为在先商品化权得到保护。  (毛立国)

 
京ICP备06005384

中国知识产权报版权所有 未经允许不得以任何形式复制转载