We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
Dissatisfied with the trademark registration of "BRITNEY
布兰妮 (BRITNEY in Chinese)" by
a third party in China, the famous star singer Britney Spears filed
suit against the China Trademark Review and Adjudication Board
(TRAB) before the Beijing First Intermediate
People's Court, requesting the Court to rescind the TRAB's
decision on maintaining the registration of the mark
"布兰妮BRITNEY".
The third party, Shenzhen Wanfuda Trading Co., Ltd.
("Wanfuda") filed an application for
registration of the mark "BRITNEY
布兰妮 (BRITNEY in Chinese)" in
August of 2001. The mark was granted registration on "clocks;
watches; etc." in class 14 on January 28, 2004 by the China
Trademark Office (CTMO) under Reg. No. 2010626.
Ms. Spears filed an application for cancellation against the said
mark with the TRAB on October 8, 2005 based on her name rights.
After examination, the TRAB maintained the registration of the
disputed mark. Ms. Spears was dissatisfied with the TRAB's
decision and therefore filed suit with the Court against the
TRAB's decision.
After examination, the Court held that the evidence submitted by
Ms. Spears was not sufficient to prove that her name had become
well-known in China when Wanfuda filed the trademark application in
2001, and Wanfuda's registered mark "BRITNEY
布兰妮 (BRITNEY in Chinese)" has
not impaired the prior name rights of Ms. Spears and therefore
maintains the registration of the disputed mark. (contributed by Fu
Yanan and Liu Shuzhen)
Biography of Ms. Spears:
Britney Jean Spears is an American recording artist and
entertainer. She signed with Jive Records in 1997 and released the
debut album Baby One More Time in 1999 which created a sales volume
record of 25 million copies and thus built her fame. Ms. Spears is
also recognized as the best-selling female artist of the first
decade of the 21st century, as well as the fifth overall by Chart
Watch Extra in 2009.
For more information about the above issue, please refer to:
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
By its judgment dated March 15, 2013, the Madras High Court ("the Court") held
that the amendment made in the year 2005 ("2005 Amendment") to section 126 of the
Patents Act, 1970 ("the Act") pertaining to the qualifications for registration as patent agents is unconstitutional.
The practice of parallel importing is a hot topic in Australia at the moment.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
