Case Study Of Trademark Use In Trademark Maintain System

Currently the vast majority of countries in the world have taken the system that one have to obtain trademark with registration. Such system would result in the easy registration of trademark, and also caused some people to hoard up for grabs trademarks and trademarks waste of resources. To mark the limited resources are not wasted, the countries have adopted a registration system provides for a certain period of continuous use of trademarks will not result in the loss of trademark rights. But what is maintaining use of the trademarks is theoretically inconsistent and in judicial practice. For the purpose of figure out what the criteria of the use of maintaining trademarks we start form the purpose of setting up this clause and by the study of international treaties and foreign legislation.Introduction by analyzing the defect leads to trademark registration system does not use the trademark revoked continuous system. Comparison of the two cases and judicial practice leads to the cancellation of the trademark is not used continuously regime applicable in judicial practice standards are not uniform issue, lead standard requires the use of trademarks as discussed below.The first chapter, led by Kang case of trademark for non-use cancellation system analysis the qualified user of this clause. In Kang case, the company license the trademark to Yunnan Dian Hong company. Yunnan Dianhong company licensed the trademark to its subsidiary, Kunming Dianhong company. The judges considered when Kang has not specifically opposed to the use of Kunming Dianhong company trademarks, Kunming Dianhong company use of the mark should be considered as Kang’s use. This chapter theory of property obtained by reference to Locke’s work demonstrates the goodwill is attributable to determine whether the use of the third person can be regarded as the standard used by trademark owners. Goodwill is a trademark licensee of accumulated both in the legal level or social level belong to the general concept of the trademark owner, signed a license agreement can be considered the licensee’s implied consent to obtain the goodwill transferred to labor trademark owners. Trademark owners implied license is divided into two: one is there but there is no written agreement desirable license, the other is the case of the trademark owner knowingly objection. The former case is no different with the written permission of the latter case is to protect the interests of the trust of the people using treated as the right to use, should apply the same rules and licensing. The right to use is generally not considered to be the use of trademark owners. TRAB that the trademark owner has not explicitly oppose the use of the trademark owner shall be deemed use of the mark, this view is wrong, the trademark owner has not explicitly oppose or may not agree with this because the trademark owner to use, but because the trademark owner is not aware of such use behavior, there can be no objection. In fact, the company and contract Silla Yunnan Dianhong signed in clear opposition Dianhong Yunnan company will use the trademark sublicense to others, so the use of the mark in Kunming Dianhong company is not authorized to use, the company is not considered Kang the amount of use.The second chapter Custer case leads trademark for non-use cancellation system analysis using real intent. Banteay company with license contracts and its licensors Banteay sales Custer red thirty multiple invoices and import value-added tax invoices Custer red case by the court under the trademark Li Tao think that is provided trademark owner for trademark real, legitimate use of the trademark disregard Li Tao always have registered well-known trademark of another person’s behavior. The court’s decision ignores the purpose of continuous withdrawal system settings without using a trademark, trademark of hoarding behavior does not effectively combat. This chapter from the perspective of comparative law, analyzes the US, EU law and jurisprudence that maintain the use of the trademark must include the real intended use. Custer believes the case has no real intention to use the trademark owner, its sporadic usage behavior just to keep the trademark is not be revoked.The third chapter Unilever v. TRAB trademark for text extraction system does not use Undo use of the mark in the form of requirements. Liu trademark owners of the use of the trademark only limited publicity of the trademark, the court found, trademark advertising trademarks of continuous withdrawal system does not use the trademark. The purpose of this chapter from trademark law and trademark for the purpose of resources without using the configuration trademarks and comparative law angle setting system demonstrates the use of the trademarks must be able to identify the source of goods or services, the mark must be disclosed for use in trade. Unilever v. TRAB case, the Court finds that the mere use of the trademarks belonging to advertising is wrong. If goods or services not actually provided, not simply advertising practices and establish goods, services and trademarks of contact, you can not play the function of a trademark to identify the source of goods, and therefore does not belong to the trademark for non-use cancellation system of trademark use.