The mineral drinking water“Ice Dew”(trademark) produced by The Coca- Cola Company(Coca-Cola) was put into the market in 2010. However, a man surnamed Zhang in Guangdong province applied the trademark“Ice Dew”for canned fruit, canned mushrooms and milk drinks, which resulted in the objection from Coca- Cola. The trademark registration was approved by Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC), then Coca- Cola issued the administrative lawsuit to the court. Recently, Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court made the judgment for the first instance, revoking the review TRAB’s decision of questioned trademark registration.

In August, 2003, Zhang applied the No. 3675199 trademark registration for the canned fruit, canned mushrooms and milk drinks according to the 29th category trademark. Coca- Cola offered the objection application to the Trademark Office of SAIC, but was denied. Then Coca- Cola applied for review to TRAB.

According to TRAB, the questioned trademark is entitled to milk drinks (milk as the main component), while the referred trademark is entitled to juice drinks (beverage), and both drinks are similar goods. Both trademarks being used on the similar goods could lead to the confusion of consumers, and caused the similar trademarks of similar goods. TRAB revoked the registration of questioned trademark on milk drinks while approved that of trademark on other goods.

Coca-Cola refused the ruling of TRAB and then issued the administrative lawsuit to the court. During the lawsuit, Coca- Cola indicated, the referred trademark had been certain well- known for many years through years of conduct propaganda and utilization especially within the 32ed category trademark. And the questioned trademark was similar to all goods except the milk drinks (milk as the main component). Thus, it was necessary to conduct the cross- category trademark protection on the referred trademark, namely, the questioned trademark should not be approved.

The court indicated, the conduct propaganda and report of CocaCola was evidential enough for the certain prominence of the referred trademark before the questioned trademark registration. The goods of questioned trademark and that of referred trademark were similar goods with similar function, marketing path and consumers. Finally, the court made the judgment revoking the TRAB ruling on the questioned trademark“Ice Dew”and urged renewed ruling on it.

(by Bai Ou)

(Source: CHINA REPORT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY)