Quiz 12 Questions Flashcards
Discussion:
G.R. No. 180677
1) How could there be an infringement on a registered trademark?
Infringement on a registered trademark exists when there is similarity in the trademark of the registered mark and the infringing mark. The gravamen of the offense of trademark infringement is the likelihood to cause confusion due to the similarity of the two marks.
G.R. No. 180677
2) There are two (2) tests used in determining the likelihood of confusion. What test is used here and why?
The test that was applied in this instant case is the holistic test. The primary reason for the application of the holistic test is jurisprudential, as it was very similar to Emerald Garment Manufacturing Corporation v. Court of Appeals.
G.R. No. 180677
3) Would there be a possibility of deception of a buyer who knows nothing of the design that has been counterfeited?
No, there would be no possibility of deception.
The test of fraudulent deception is not found in the deception, or the possibility of deception, of the person who knows nothing about the design which has been counterfeited, and who must be indifferent between that and the other.
G.R. No. 198889
4) What is the range of the protection of the trademark in order that the trademark registered products would not be confused as to source?
The scope of protection afforded to registered trademark owners is not limited to protection from infringers with identical goods. The scope of protection extends to protection from infringers with related goods, and to market areas that are the normal expansion of business of the registered trademark owners.
G.R. No. 198889
5) Under the Dominancy Test, is actual confusion required in order for trademarks to be declared confusingly similar?
No. Under dominancy test, actual confusion is not required in order for a trademark to be declared confusingly similar to another. What are assessed are the visual and aural similarities, together with connotative comparison and overall impressions of the the two similar marks.
G.R. No. 198889
6) Is the word “PAPA” an arbitrary and fanciful word capable of being registered?
Yes. “PAPA” is an arbitrary and fanciful word capable of being registered by the petitioner. Although a term of endearment, “PAPA” is not directly associated with ketchup, which is the primary reason for its capability of being registered as a mark.
“PAPA” is also distinctive as its usage does not mean the term of endearment of a head of a family, but “PAPA” being the last name of the owner of the brand.
Notes:
