The case holding that the applied service mark " " cannot be registered pursuant to Article 6 (1) 3 of the Trademark Act as a non-distinctive service mark merely consisting of a mark indicating the nature of a designated service business in a common way.

The case holding that since the pending service mark " " " is highly likely to be directly perceived as meaning "for the purpose of using it in news reporting services, etc. (out of editing)" when it is used in the designated service business, it constitutes a text service mark consisting of a shot of "no," which is marked in Korean language as "no," and "News," which is linked without referring to "news," which is marked in Korean language, and used in the designated service business, and the designated service mark is directly expressed in the nature (quality, quality, use, etc.) of the above designated service business, the above designated service mark constitutes a service mark with no distinctiveness used solely with a mark expressing the nature of the designated service business in a common way, and thus, it cannot be registered pursuant to Article 6 (1) 3 of the Trademark Act.

Article 6 (1) 3 of the Trademark Act

Supreme Court Decision 2002Hu1140 Decided August 16, 2004 (Gong2004Ha, 1552) Supreme Court Decision 2005Hu2595 Decided January 26, 2006, Supreme Court Decision 2004Hu2109 Decided March 10, 2006 (Gong2006Sang, 676)

Women of Nowon News Co., Ltd. (Patent Attorney Won-soo et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

The Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office

January 10, 2007

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on September 29, 2006 on the case No. 2006 Won125 shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute】

(a) Details of the trial decision;

The Korean Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter “Korea Intellectual Property Office”) rendered a decision of rejection on the ground that the pending service mark referred to in Article 6(1)3 of the Trademark Act is a service mark indicating the quality and use of the service in a common way, and that the pending service mark falls under Article 6(1)3 of the Trademark Act, and the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal also rendered a decision of rejection on the same ground that the plaintiff's appeal against the above decision of rejection was dismissed.

B. The pending service mark

(1) Composition:

(2) Date/ Number of the application: February 25, 2005/ 2005-4203

(c) Designated goods: Radio broadcasting business, wire and television broadcasting business, Internet broadcasting business, television broadcasting business, etc. (category 38), entertainment information provision business, news news report service business, etc. (category 41 category);

2. Whether the pending service mark constitutes a technical mark

(a) Legal doctrine;

Article 6 (1) 3 of the Trademark Act provides that a trademark consisting solely of a mark indicating the origin, quality, efficacy, use, etc. of the designated goods in a common way shall not be registered. The purport of the above mark is that it is necessary for anyone to use it because it wishes to use it in the distribution process of ordinary goods, and that if it is permitted to use it exclusively to a specific person, it is difficult to distinguish it from other goods of the same kind. Whether a trademark constitutes it is determined objectively by taking into account the concept of the trademark, the relationship with the designated goods, the circumstances of the trade society, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Hu140, Aug. 16, 2004, etc.). However, even if it appears that the trademark appears to have expressed or emphasized the quality, efficacy, use of the designated goods, the whole composition of the trademark must be deemed to have been rejected only after being declared as a mere quality, efficacy, and use of the designated goods when it is deemed to have been rejected (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Hu165, 2006.

(b) Markets:

[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul Nos. 1 through 4 (including paper numbers), experience, and purport of the whole pleadings]

The pending service mark of this case is a character service mark consisting of a shot of the word “no” and the word “News” indicated in Korean language with the word “news,” which is linked without using the word “news,” and both “No” belongs to the word “No” 1,000 word in the basic language of a middle school of Korea, and it is easily recognized as meaning “no” to mean “no,” and “no,” without deletion,” and accordingly, it is highly probable that the term “no,” when used in the news reporting service business, etc. during the designated service business, is directly expressed in excess of the degree of expressing the nature (quality, quality, use, etc.) of the above designated service business, and thus, the pending service mark of this case constitutes a service mark without distinguishingability under Article 6(1)3 of the Trademark Act, which is a service mark indicating the character of the above designated service business in a common way.

(c) Conclusion

Therefore, as long as the pending service mark contains a service business that reports news as it is without editing, the entire application cannot be registered under Article 6 (1) 3 of the Trademark Act.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the decision of this case is legitimate, and the plaintiff's claim seeking its revocation is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Ki-taik (Presiding Judge)