Date of
Judgment: May 29, 1984
Issuing
Authority: Supreme Court
Level of
the Issuing Authority: Final Instance
Type of
Procedure: Judicial (Civil)
Subject
Matter: Trademarks
Summary
of the judgment (decision):
1. Concerning whether or not
a particular commodity label falls under "an item similar to a label
representing a third party's commodity" described in Article 1, Paragraph
1, Sub-paragraph 1 of the Unfair Competition Prevention Law; it is appropriate
to determine as the criterion whether traders or consumers are likely to accept
these two labels as similar overall in terms of impression, memory,
association, and the like by external appearance, naming, or notion, in the
context of the actual business.
2. A group united for the
common purpose of protecting and enhancing the function of identifying the
origin of the goods, the function of guaranteeing the quality, and the customer
appeal embodied by a particular commodity label or business label under a merchandising
agreement on a particular commodity label or business label is included in the
"third party" described in Article 1, Paragraph 1, Sub-paragraph 1
and 2 of the Unfair Competition Prevention Law.
3. "An act of causing
confusion" described in Article 1, Paragraph 1, Item 1, and Item 2 of the
Unfair Competition Prevention Law includes the act of using a label identical
or similar to the commodity label or business label belonging to the group
conducting the business of merchandising the same label, thereby causing
misidentification of the user thereof as belonging to the said group, but for
an act of causing confusion to be established, there is no prerequisite for
assuming the existence of a competing relationship between the two parties as a
premise.
4. A party whose interests
in the business are likely to be undermined as described in the main body of
Article 1, Paragraph 1 of the Unfair Competition Prevention Law includes a
party who is engaged in the business of merchandising the well-known label as the
Licensor or the Licensee of the same label, and this is likely to result in the
management and control of the Sublicensee, as well as indication of the origin
of the goods, the function of guaranteeing the quality, and the customer appeal
embodied by the same label being undermined.
(This
translation is provisional and subject to revision.)