Sharp Beats Chih Yu, a Lubricant Manufacturer.

TIPO approved a trademark application for “SHARP” mark and device filed three years ago by Chih Yu Enterprise Co., Ltd. which is situated in Kaohsiung and engaged in manufacturing lubricant and relevant products.  The Japan-based electric appliances manufacturer, Sharp Corporation filed an opposition against the trademark registration by the reason that Chih Yu’s “SHARP” mark would cause consumers confusion and requested revoke Chih Yu’s right to file trademark registration application.  The Taiwan Supreme Administrative Court ruled that Chih Yu’s “SHARP” mark shares similarity with Sharp Corporation’s well-recognized “SHARP” mark in the all-capital letters, pronunciation, and concept, and thus determined in favor of Sharp Corporation.  Therefore, Chih Yu’s trademark registration for “SHARP” mark and device should be cancelled. 

To this decision, Chih Yu argued that its “SHARP” mark and device, except for the English letters of its “SHARP” mark, differs from Sharp Corporation’s “SHARP” mark in the rectangular square framing Chih Yu’s “SHARP” mark and also in word font.  Chih Yu also maintained that it has been established and operated in Taiwan for many years to have business with vehicles companies and auto repair and maintenance shops as its main trading counterparts, and that no simultaneous sale of both Chih Yu’s and Sharp Corporation’s products at the same points of sales has ever occurred.  Therefore, Chih Yu saw no possibility of consumers confusion between the two trademarks in question. 

Sharp Corporation countered Chih Yu’s argument by pointing out the high association between the two companies by the reasons that its “SHARP” mark has been well-known and highly distinctive, and “mechanic products and components thereof” have also been under the coverage of Sharp’s business items. 

TIPO held that the slight design difference of Chih Yu’s “SHARP” mark and device with Sharp’s “SHARP” mark does not avoid general consumers’ confusion and the consumers would mistakenly think the two companies to be the same one.  Based on the reasons, TIPO canceled Chih Yu’s trademark registration.  Chih Yu disagreed with such a decision and initiated administrative proceedings.  (2010.10) 

Supreme Administrative Court docket number: (99) Pan-Tze No. 951 [2010]
/CCS