Rethinking Coexistence Between Prior Trademarks and Later Geographical Indications

被引:0
|
作者
Wang, Xiaoyan [1 ]
Song, Xinzhe [2 ]
机构
[1] China Univ Polit Sci & Law, Civil Commercial & Econ Law Sch, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Hainan Univ, Sch Law, Haikou, Hainan, Peoples R China
关键词
geographical indication; trademark; coexistence; principle of priority; World Trade Organization; likelihood of confusion; misleading use; reputation of prior trademark; descriptive use; use in a trademark sense;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The coexistence principle presents a means for resolving the conflict between prior trademarks and later geographical indications (GIs). This principle has been increasingly adopted in several countries due to recent negotiation efforts of the EU that are meant to combat the 'first in time, first in right' ('FITFIR') principle promoted by the US. This article focuses on three controversial issues raised in the application of the coexistence principle. The World Trade Organization (WTO) Panel Reports in the Australia-EU (DS290) and US-EU (DS174) disputes related to EU Regulation 2081/92 mentioned these issues but left them unresolved, thereby making space for the EU to require trade partners to widen the scope of coexistence between prior trademarks and later GIs in a manner that runs counter to the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement). Furthermore, these unresolved issues led to difficulties in applying the coexistence principle and EU-type coexistence clause adopted in non-EU WTO Members. Based on the findings, this article recommends appropriate methods for implementing the coexistence principle that are consistent with the TRIPS Agreement.
引用
收藏
页码:831 / 852
页数:22
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [1] Conflict Between Geographical Indications and Trademarks
    Kelblova, Hana
    [J]. KVASNY PRUMYSL, 2012, 58 (11-12): : 343 - 349
  • [2] European case law and the WTO ruling on conflicts between geographical indications and trademarks
    Kireeva I.
    [J]. ERA Forum, 2009, 10 (2) : 199 - 214
  • [3] Quality certification by geographical indications, trademarks and firm reputation
    Menapace, Luisa
    Moschini, GianCarlo
    [J]. EUROPEAN REVIEW OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2012, 39 (04) : 539 - 566
  • [4] EU TRADEMARKS FOR WINE WHICH CONTAINS INDICATIONS OF GEOGRAPHICAL ORIGIN
    Lucic, Sonja
    [J]. EKONOMIKA POLJOPRIVREDA-ECONOMICS OF AGRICULTURE, 2018, 65 (02): : 715 - 729
  • [5] Rethinking Nigerian geographical indications law
    Oke, Emmanuel Kolawole
    [J]. JOURNAL OF WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, 2022, 25 (03): : 746 - 752
  • [6] Mineral Stone as a Natural Resource in the Protection of Geographical Indications Based on Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications
    Kusumaningtyas, Rindia Fanny
    Rahayu, Sang Ayu Putu
    Wibowo, Aditya
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INDONESIAN LEGAL STUDIES (ICILS 2019), 2019, 363 : 46 - 56
  • [7] CONFLICTS BETWEEN GEOGRAPHICAL DESIGNATIONS AND TRADEMARKS IN ARGENTINE LAW
    Sandra Molina, Marcela
    [J]. REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO, 2017, 44 (01): : 107 - 132
  • [8] Champagne, Cognac, Rioja, Jerez and Vales dos Vinhedos: Conflicts between trademarks and geographical indications of wines and spirits in Brazil
    da Silva Barhosa, Patricia Maria
    Dupim, Luiz Claudio
    Bruch, Kelly Lisandra
    Peralta, Patricia Pereira
    [J]. 39TH WORLD CONGRESS OF VINE AND WINE, 2016, 7
  • [9] An analysis of the European Communities: Protection of Trademarks and Geographical Indications for Agricultural Products and Foodstuffs Dispute
    Charlier, Christophe
    Ngo, Mai-Anh
    [J]. JOURNAL OF WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, 2007, 10 (3-4): : 171 - 186
  • [10] Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Environmental Labelling to Promote Biodiversity: The Case of Agroforestry Coffee in India
    Marie-Vivien, Delphine
    Garcia, Claude A.
    Kushalappa, C. G.
    Vaast, Philippe
    [J]. DEVELOPMENT POLICY REVIEW, 2014, 32 (04) : 379 - 398