MARKS IP LAW FIRM

Japanese IP Attorney Firm specializing in Trademarks with a commitment to excellence

Home / Blog / Article 3(1)(vi)

Japan IP High Court ruling: “I♡JAPAN” lacks distinctiveness as a trademark

2020年6月28日Article 3(1)(vi), I love Japan, inherent distinctiveness, IP High Court, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, JPO, lack of distinctiveness, trademark appeal, trademark applicationAbbreviation, Article 3(1)(vi), Composite mark, compound mark, Device mark, Inherent distinctiveness, IP High Court, Refusal appeal, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

On June 17, 2020, the Japan IP High Court affirmed the JPO’s rejection of the “I♡JAPAN” mark in relation to various goods of class 14,16,18 and 24 due to a lack of distinctiveness. [Judicial case no. Reiwa...

SWATCH Defeated in SWATCH vs iWATCH Trademark Dispute

2020年3月15日Apple Inc., Article 3(1)(iii), Article 3(1)(vi), Article 4(1)(xi), Article 4(1)(xv), Article 4(1)(xvi), Famous mark, invalidation trial, iWATCH, JAPAN PATENT OFFICE, Japan Trademark Law, Likelihood of confusion, Swatch, Trademark oppositionArticle 3(1)(iii), Article 3(1)(vi), Article 4(1)(xi), Article 4(1)(xv), Article 4(1)(xvi), Article 46, Composite mark, Famous mark, Invalidation trial, Likelihood of confusion, Similarity of mark, Trademark OppositionMasaki MIKAMI

The Trial Board of Japan Patent Office (JPO) dismissed an invalidation petition by Swiss watch giant, Swatch against TM Reg. no. 5849925 for word mark “iWATCH” owned by U.S. tech giant, Apple Inc.[Invalidation case...

Trademark race for the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games – Episode 2

2019年2月2日Article 3(1)(vi), Heart shape, JPO, OLYMPIC, Olympic symbolArticle 3(1)(vi), Device mark, Famous markMasaki MIKAMI

The Appeal Board of Japan Patent Office (JPO) refused Trademark Application No. 2017-11978 for a device mark consisting of five interlaced heart shape logos for goods of clothing and footwear in class 25 because of similarity to Olympic rings...

AI SCAN ROBO

2018年12月16日AI, AI SCAN ROBO, Article 3(1)(vi), inherent distinctivenessArticle 3(1)(vi), Inherent distinctiveness, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

In a recent administrative decision, the Appeal Board of Japan Patent Office (JPO) allowed registration for a word mark of “AI SCAN ROBO”, finding that the mark could function as a source indicator.
[Appeal case no. 2018-5433, Gazette issue...

Is Polaroid Photo Frame trademarked?

2018年8月26日Article 3(1)(vi), Japan Trademark Law, JPO, PolaroidArticle 3(1)(vi), Device mark, Inherent distinctiveness, Refusal appeal, Trademark AppealMasaki MIKAMI

In a recent decision, the Appeal Board of Japan Patent Office (JPO) admitted trademark registration for the Polaroid Photo Frame design mark (see below) in relation to services of photo printing, digital on-demand printing, processing of...

MARKS IP LAW FIRM

Subscribe and Follow

Article 3(1)(vi)

Japan IP High Court ruling: “I♡JAPAN” lacks distinctiveness as a trademark

SWATCH Defeated in SWATCH vs iWATCH Trademark Dispute

Trademark race for the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games – Episode 2

AI SCAN ROBO

Is Polaroid Photo Frame trademarked?

Our Facebook Page