"The old man" image is not copyrighted "old city" logo
few days ago, the Beijing Municipal higher people's Court on the "old city" trademark suit in the Court of final appeal judgement, old city, Shishi, Fujian, garments Co Ltd (hereinafter referred to as the old city) held its 1,497,462th, "LAORENCHENG and old city map" registered trademark.
It is understood that the 1,497,462th trademark of old city on October 12, 1999, in December 2000 and registered. On it. Hong Kong, China huayuan company on June 27, 2002, the State administration for industry and Commerce trademark review and adjudication Board (hereinafter referred to as the judges) you withdraw your application, in its trademark on the grounds that the 1,497,462th "old" graphics instead of the earlier registration and the use of "old" graphics trademark are very similar, and to approve the use of the categories for the 25th class of goods and therefore undermines its prior right to use this trademark.
It is understood that judges determine in March 2009, 23, withdrew the 1,497,462th trademark. In the case of a trial, said huayuan company in the old city of "old head" graphic trademark originates from a piece into the public domain by Leonardo da Vinci self-portrait, huayuan company for the graphics are copyrighted. In this regard, the Court of first instance held that, they are not the same work, huayuan company logos should be protected by the copyright laws, 1,497,462th trademark in the "old head" graphic in the same basic and, therefore, constitute damage to the huayuan company logo graphic copyright, and should be removed.
It is understood that after the Beijing Municipal higher people's Court in the trial of the case says that huayuan company after the judges filed review requests, even though advocates dispute the registration infringed on its trademark rights, but does not specify the prior rights is copyright, and can confirm the claimed prior right for copyright and trademark protection of copyright law works. Cannot determine the 1,497,462th registration infringed on its copyrights. Because according to the relevant laws and regulations, trade mark application and the corresponding license notice is merely show that registered trademark rights of ownership, but not absolute indicates that graphics copyright ownership of a registered trademark, and the existing evidence is not sufficient to prove that the case of huayuan company logo copyright.
accordingly, the final withdrawal of judges of the Court of second instance decision of the verdict and the case, judges have to be made by huayuan company has withdrawn his application again as the ruling.