Period? Good News? Overstatement?
The Korean Times has a rare decent article on recent trademark decisions in Korea. What jumps out at me immediately however is a, perhaps unintentional, trend in the cases cited:Does last year's Starbucks v. Starpreya battle over beverage brands ring a bell?
A trademark infringement case, in which the court sided with the local out-of-the-truck seller - with a strikingly similar look and feel to Starbucks - against the world's largest coffee chain stirred observers to ask, ``How close can you come in Korea?''
Pretty close - but almost a year later, the court last week ruled against a ``PC bang'' (Internet cafe) that apparently copied a competitor's brand, which law experts say is a landmark decision that sends businesses a strong message.
...
Two years after Zone & Zone PC bang filed a suit in 2005 against LOHAS for stealing insider information and brand imitation, the Seoul District Court sentenced the defendants to six to eight months in prison suspended for two years for infringing the Trade Secret and Unfair Competition Law.
...
Chicken franchise Kyochon and its alleged copycat Pochon Chicken, and pub chain Jjoki Jjoki against eateries Suhyouki and Black Jjoki are major examples of local look-alike businesses.
As Jjoki Jjoki currently has a case filed against Suhyouki, the company spokeswoman says they are optimistic about the outcome.
Hmm...what which one of these is not like the other: Starbucks, Zone & Zone, Kyochon, Jjoki Jjoki. I like to think some things about Korea's IP environment, but things like this slap me in the face. I hope its all a coincidence the reporter put these things together.
One other thing strikes me in the article:
Two years after Zone & Zone PC bang filed a suit in 2005 against LOHAS for stealing insider information and brand imitation, the Seoul District Court sentenced the defendants to six to eight months in prison suspended for two years for infringing the Trade Secret and Unfair Competition Law.
"An appeal is yet to be heard, but the ruling so far is good news for the franchise industry,'' said Samantha Min, a lawyer of YOU ME Patent & Law Firm.
...
She said that the Intellectual Property Law itself isn't lenient here, but the punishment is.
While I can agree with Ms. Min on the punishment issue, there is something missing here. Based on my experience, such a heavy sentence is not given out in the run-of-the-mill unfair competition case. My guess is that was some proof LOHAS acted in bad-faith or willfully. Particularly with the citing of the "trade secret" law, which usually needs some "smoking gun" type evidence. Accordingly, I doubt this case is as applicable to others as Ms. Min says so. Likewise, I doubt the absolute tone invoked by Mr. Kim Joong-hyo, a patent attorney at Choice Law Office quoted in the article:
"It tells them that imitating is illegal - period,''
Time will tell Mr. Kim, but I ain't holding my breath simply given this case.
posted by Dram Man @ 10:25 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home