{"id":786,"date":"2019-12-10T11:17:51","date_gmt":"2019-12-10T02:17:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/?post_type=updates&amp;p=786"},"modified":"2019-12-10T11:17:51","modified_gmt":"2019-12-10T02:17:51","slug":"suit-against-invalidation-appeal-decision-of-trademark-application","status":"publish","type":"updates","link":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/updates\/786\/","title":{"rendered":"Suit against Invalidation Appeal Decision of Trademark Application"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>[Suit against Invalidation Appeal Decision of Trademark Application]<\/p>\n<p>[Key issue] &#8220;Likely to cause confusion&#8221; (Article 4, paragraph (1), item (xv) of the Trademark Act).<\/p>\n<table style=\"width: 439px;\">\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"width: 200px; text-align: center;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Trademark at issue<\/span><\/td>\n<td style=\"width: 200px; text-align: center;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Cited Trademark<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"width: 208px;\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-787 aligncenter\" src=\"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/20191210_01.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"156\" height=\"121\" \/><\/td>\n<td style=\"width: 215px;\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-790 aligncenter\" src=\"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/20191210_02.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"151\" height=\"123\" \/><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>Considering the following facts, Court concluded that the Trademark &#8220;is likely to cause confusion&#8221;:<br \/>\nWhile the Trademark and the Cited Trademark are different in silhouette, and because of the presence or lack of a design that is outlined by a white line inside, and other features, the two trademarks are similar in the entire silhouette.<br \/>\nThe Cited Trademark has become a well-known trademark that is widely recognized by traders and consumers in Japan as a trademark indicating clothing, caps, hats, and the like of the brand, &#8220;PUMA&#8221;, pertaining to the plaintiff&#8217;s business.<br \/>\nWhile the designated goods of the Trademark are &#8220;tee-shirts; headgear for wear&#8221;, the brand, &#8220;PUMA&#8221;, also covers products of T-shirts, caps, and hats&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","updates_tag":[3],"class_list":["post-786","updates","type-updates","status-publish","hentry","updates_tag-court-judgment"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/updates\/786","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/updates"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/updates"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=786"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"updates_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/ksilawpat.jp\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/updates_tag?post=786"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}