특허심판원 2017.11.14. 심결 2016당1614 상표 권리범위확인(적극) 심결에 대하여

• 영문명: A Case Study Regarding Trademark Trial Board Case No. 2016DANG1614 for Declaratory Judgement of “REVANESSE” over “REVINESS” for Class 03
• 발행기관: 세창출판사
• 저자명: 최덕규(Dukkyu Choi)
• 간행물 정보: 『창작과 권리』2018년 봄호 (제90호), 2~20쪽, 전체 19쪽
• 주제분류: 법학 > 법학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2018.03.01

영문 초록

The petitioner, a Canadian company, is the owner of a Korean trademark registration for “REVANESSE” in class 03 (cosmetic gel in prefilled syringes for use in cosmetic treatment procedures). The counterpart, a Korean company, had used “REVINESS” on the same goods in Korea. When the petitioner sent a cease and desist letter to the counterpart, the counterpart replied that their mark is not similar to the registered mark. Thus, the petitioner filed a trial for Declaratory Judgement with the Trademark Trial Board. Awfully, the Trial Board dismissed the trial, reasoning that the counterpart’s mark is not similar to the registered mark of the petitioner in their sound and appearance. Crazy, crazy and crazy.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말

Ⅱ. 심결문

Ⅲ. 심결의 문제점

Ⅳ. 결 어

키워드

유사성 칭호 외관 관념 충동구매 분별구매 Similarity Sound Appearance Connotation Impulse Purchase Discriminating Purchase