{"id":326,"date":"2019-08-04T13:51:04","date_gmt":"2019-08-04T04:51:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/?p=326"},"modified":"2021-02-22T14:33:39","modified_gmt":"2021-02-22T05:33:39","slug":"vol-22-abc%e3%82%ab%e3%82%a4%e3%83%ad%e3%83%97%e3%83%a9%e3%82%af%e3%83%86%e3%82%a3%e3%83%83%e3%82%af","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/article\/case\/326\/","title":{"rendered":"Vol.18 (ABC CHIROPRACTIC)"},"content":{"rendered":"

H30 (WA) No. 11204\u00a0 trademark right infringement case judged by the Tokyo District Court<\/h3>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The subject mark and\u3000the used\u3000mark mean and sound as ABC\u00a0chiropractic and ABC\u00a0chiropractic center, respectively.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Class 44<\/p>\n

Chiropractic, etc.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    Conclusion<\/h3>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The subject registered mark was judged to be similar to the mark \u201cABC\u201d of a third party, and the defendant\u2019s plea was accepted.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

      \n
    1. \n

      My comments<\/h3>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      The subject mark should be clearly similar to the defendant\u2019s mark because they only differ in the word meaning \u201ccenter\u201d. However, the plaintiff could not succeed in the enforcement due to the presence of the registration which has nothing to do with the plaintiff and defendant. The plaintiff registered the mark and filed this lawsuit only to waste time and money. It should be difficult for the plaintiff to understand and accept such a situation.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Some Japanese Examiners less strictly judge the distinctiveness of marks than courts. However, the registrations through such generous examinations can be invalidated like this case.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      If the plaintiff had known this result before they had adopted the mark, they would have changed the mark. This case makes us find it important to review the\u00a0<\/span>possibility\u00a0<\/span>of a trademark invalidation as well as a trademark registration when we search a mark.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      H30 (WA) No. 11204\u00a0 trademark right infringement case judged by the Tokyo District Court The subject mark and\u3000 … <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":663,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[5],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/326"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=326"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/326\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":981,"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/326\/revisions\/981"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/663"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=326"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=326"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bran-design.jp\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=326"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}