IP Court Let Stand Taiwan IPO’s Denial of Registration of the 三井選品 Mark.

　Mitsui’s Choice Co. filed its三井選品Chinese character mark for registration (which literally means “Mitsui’s choice”).  Taiwan IPO disapproved the application.  The applicant thus brought an administrative suit in the IP Court.  The IP Court finds in favor of the defendant agency concurring on the proposed mark’s being similar to the corporate designation and relevant registered marks of Mitsui & Co., Ltd., which similarity will very likely confuse the consuming public.  Mitsui’s Choice Co. may take an appeal. (See IP Court Administrative Judgment of 29 December 2011 on case 100-Xing-Shang-Su-Zi No. 145.)

　Mitsui’s Choice Co., a flagship company under the Mitsui Food & Beverage Enterprise Group operates a Japanese-style haute supermarket.  Mitsui’s Choice Co. argues the proposed mark is consisted of four Chinese characters of special calligraphy design and two English words, mitsui style, with the character井presented in artistic intaglio and relief, where the last two Chinese characters combined means, according to Mitsui’s Choice, Mitsui Choice sells the finest products and only the finest products of its choice.  Therefore, Mitsui’s Choise contends, the proposed mark is original and it makes big consumer impression.  Also, the first two Chinese characters combined is a common Japanese surname and there are various registered mark co-existing in Taiwan each consisting of the same two characters, not to mention that many firms are using these two characters to designate themselves.  Furthermore, the proposed mark has been used and well known in the trade of distribution and importation of food and seafood, which line of business is totally different from the main business of the owner of the cited mark.

　Taiwan IPO denied registration of the proposed mark on the mark being similar to three prior registered marks: the 三井, 三井物產and MITSUI registered marks owned by Mitsui & Co., Ltd., which similarity will easily cause confusion to the consumer.  Trademark protection should be given to prior legal registered marks so the IP Court upholds Taiwan IPO’s decision.  (2012.01)
/EMA