NOT MADE IN CHINA


The People’s Daily Online reports on the furore surrounding an application for three Community trade marks containing the term NOT MADE IN CHINA. The mark has been branded ‘discriminatory’ against Chinese products and a disgrace to Chinese dignity. OHIM is expected to make a decision on registrability in about a year’s time.


The IPKat says that the mark is certainly not deceptive. Is it contrary to public policy though? Perhaps more interestingly, is a mark which tells consumers about the qualities that goods do not have descriptive? Often the answer must be yes (e.g. CONTAINS NO CARBS) but is a mark truly descriptive where it tells consumers that goods do not have a quality which they would not expect the goods to have in any event. For example, would a registration of DOES NOT CONTAIN ELEPHANTS be descriptive of chocolate?

View the applied for mark here
NOT MADE IN CHINA NOT MADE IN CHINA Reviewed by Anonymous on Friday, February 24, 2006 Rating: 5

2 comments:

  1. There are a number of negative trade marks registered in the UK. One of the better ones is 1468738 "NOT DOG" for meat substitutes in class 30. OHIM have accepted the three "NOT MADE IN CHINA" applications so it is up to someone to oppose when they are published.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Don't forget NOT MADE IN FRANCE, which was refused for clothing in the USA on grounds of descriptiveness, I seem to recall. It was reported in the ETMR within recent memory ...

    ReplyDelete

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.