Education, Science, Technology, Innovation and Life
Open Access
Sign In

Determination of Relevant Public Confusion in Trademark Reverse Confusion

Download as PDF

DOI: 10.23977/law.2022.010304 | Downloads: 14 | Views: 476

Author(s)

Yuan Zhong 1, Qiuyan Huang 1

Affiliation(s)

1 Guangdong University of Finance & Economics, Guangzhou, 510320, China

Corresponding Author

Qiuyan Huang

ABSTRACT

As a new confusion model, reverse confusion has many differences from forward confusion. There are also a large number of cases involving the trademark reverse confusion in judicial practice, but China's Trademark Law has not introduced corresponding legislation on this, not to make corresponding provisions on the determination of relevant public confusion. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce the theory of reverse confusion. The determination of relevant public confusion is the key to the study of the theory of trademark reverse confusion. Clarifying the definition and scope of relevant public confusion are of particular significance to determine the infringement of trademark reverse confusion. This paper will briefly analyze the issue of determination of relevant public confusion in trademark reverse confusion, and propose the introduction of a questionnaire survey model and the construction of an analytical model to prove whether confusion actually occurred among the relevant public in individual case. It is hoped that the theory of reverse confusion can be promoted into the law, so as to provide a certain basis for the application of law in the specific trial of relevant cases.

KEYWORDS

Trademark reverse confusion, relevant public, likelihood of confusion, infringement determination

CITE THIS PAPER

Yuan Zhong, Qiuyan Huang, Determination of Relevant Public Confusion in Trademark Reverse Confusion. Science of Law Journal (2022) Vol. 1: 22-32. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/DOI: 10.23977/law.2022.010304.

REFERENCES

[1] S.Q, Zhang. (2018) Logical Relationship among Four Elements of Trademark Infringement. People's Judicature, 17, 82-86.
[2] Y, Tang. (2018) Talking about the Appraisal Criterion of Trademark from the Perspective of General Public's Attention. China Trademark, 06, 60-61.
[3] Y.M, Li., X.T, Liu. (2019) An Analysis of "Relevant Public" in Trademark Law. Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 49, 04, 103-115.
[4] A.G, Zhang. (2011) "Consumers" and "Relevant Public" in Trademark Law. China Trademark, 05, 30-32+4.
[5] S, Song. (2016) A Study on the Judicial Application in the Reverse Confusion of Trademark. Electronics Intellectual Property, 03, 28-36.
[6] Y.Q, Wang. (2019) Selection of Trademark Reverse Obfuscation Remedy Model. Northern Legal Science, 13, 63-71.
[7] Richard, L., Kirkatrick. (2010) Likelihood of Confusion in Trademark Law. New York: Practising Law Institute, 2.4.
[8] Barton, B. (2006) An Empirical Study of the Multifactor Tests for Trademark Infringement, 91 Cal. L. Rev. 1623-1642.
[9] W.S, Huang., Q.Y, Chen. (2022) The Judicial Application of Non-cessation Infringement in the Case of Reverse Confusion of Trademark. Science Technology and Law Chinese-English, 01, 101-108.

All published work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2016 - 2031 Clausius Scientific Press Inc. All Rights Reserved.