Tiếng Việt English  
Home Our People Experiences Associations Contact us
Letter of Consent Acceptable or Rejectable in the ASEAN Region according to the 2010 WIPO Questionnaire?
(Ngày đăng: 2020-09-11)

Letter of Consent Acceptable or Rejectable

in the ASEAN Region according to the 2010 WIPO Questionnaire?

 

Email: vinh@bross.vn

 

Viewpoint of some ASEAN countries on Letter of Consent

 

It is known that a Letter of Consent (also known as Consent Letter, Consent Agreement, Coexistence Agreement) is deemed as one of the four effective remedies that may help you overcome a refusal of protection of trademark based on a likelihood of confusion with a pre-existing trademark[1].

 

However, Letter of Consent is approved by this country but may be rejected by another country. Let’s take a look at the viewpoint of 4 countries including Vietnam, Singapore, the Philippines and Malaysia through the 2010 survey comprising 9 key questions rendered by the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications as below:

Question 1

1. Is it possible to overcome the following through the presentation of a Letter of Consent?

An ex officio refusal of a trademark registration based on an earlier registered trademark?

An opposition to a trademark registration based on an earlier registered trademark?

A request for invalidation or cancellation of a trademark registration based on an earlier registered trademark?

Malaysia answered

NO

NO REGULATION

NO REGULATION

Philippines answered

NO

NO

NO

Singapore answered

YES

NO REGULATION

NO REGULATION

Viet Nam answered

YES

YES

YES

Question 2

2. Is a Letter of Consent acceptable if it is filed by an applicant that is a legal person belonging to the same group of enterprises as the holder?

Malaysia answered

NO REGULATION

Philippines answered

YES

Singapore answered

YES

Viet Nam answered

YES

Question 3

3. Is a Letter of Consent regarding identical marks for identical goods or services acceptable?

Malaysia answered

NO

Philippines answered

NO

Singapore answered

YES

Viet Nam answered

NO

Question 4

4. If a third application is filed for a similar trademark as was registered on the basis of a Letter of Consent, is the applicant required to file Letters of Consent from all holders of earlier registrations?

Malaysia answered

NO REGULATION

Philippines answered

NO REGULATION

Singapore answered

YES

Viet Nam answered

YES

Question 5

5. Should a Letter of Consent meet formal requirements such as: mandatory content or an Office form?

Mandatory content

An Office form

Malaysia answered

NO REGULATION

NO REGULATION

Philippines answered

NO REGULATION

NO REGULATION

Singapore answered

YES

NO

Viet Nam answered

YES

NO

Question 6

6. Could a Letter of Consent be admissible only for a specific period of time?

Malaysia answered

NO REGULATION

Philippines answered

NO REGULATION

Singapore answered

NO

Viet Nam answered

NO

Question 7

7. Is there any restriction to transfer a trademark which was granted on the basis of a Letter of Consent?

Malaysia answered

NO REGULATION

Philippines answered

NO REGULATION

Singapore answered

NO

Viet Nam answered

YES

Question 8

8. Is it possible to withdraw a Letter of Consent after a trademark was granted on that basis?

8(a) Does withdrawal cause the registration to lapse?

Malaysia answered

NO REGULATION

NO REGULATION

Philippines answered

NO REGULATION

NO REGULATION

Singapore answered

YES

NO REGULATION

Viet Nam answered

NO REGULATION

NO REGULATION

Question 9

9. Is the presentation of a copy of the Letter of Consent required for the renewal of a trademark registration granted on that basis?

Malaysia answered

NO REGULATION

Philippines answered

NO REGULATION

Singapore answered

NO

Viet Nam answered

NO

         

 

Our Additional Comments

 

  1. Letter of Consent (other similar wordings as Consent Letter, Consent Agreement, Coexistence Agreement) is in nature a written agreement, whether in the form of a simple statement or a co-existence agreement, according to which the owner/registrant of cited trademark (which is already registered and used by the Trademark Authority to reject the applied-for trademark due to a likelihood of confusion with the cited trademark) consents to the registration and use of that applied-for trademark. However, even if applicant already presented a Letter of Consent, it is not possible to ensure that the public or consumers would not be misled about the commercial origin of good, service because the purpose of trademark law is to protect not only the trademark owner’s legitimate rights and interests but also to prevent the consumer from confusion. This is the rationale explaining why there may be different viewpoints decided by the different countries regarding Letter of Consent.

 

  1. The term “Consent Letter” is not specified in the legislation of each questioned country and similarly there is no definition “Letter of Consent” available in the 2005 Law on Intellectual Property of Vietnam. Because Letter of Consent represents the right to dispose of earlier trademark holder, who is holding the exclusive right to use the registered trademark, therefore, many countries suppose that the Trademark Office should respect[2]. On the other hand, the majority of countries participating in the survey (accounting for 68%) favor the practice of acceptance of Letter of Consent as a way to overcome refusal of protection in the trademark prosecution

 

  1. For example, according to the above survey, although Malaysia declares not accepting Letter of Consent as a way to overcome refusal of protection in registration procedure, Malaysia may in practice approve Letter of Consent if the relevant parties could additionally provide the MyIPO with co-existent evidence in the form of honest concurrent use as the example below:

 

Applied-for mark

Earlier trade mark

Comment

Registration No. 90000335

Class 29: Oil (edible oil)

 

Registration No. M/083601

Class 29: Oil (edible oil)

 

 

The MyIPO consents the concurrent use by the two brands WAU in the Malaysian market by granting a registration to the trademark applied for in the left column because the earlier trademark owner provided a Letter of Consent wherein stating that the applicant’s WAU-branded oil product shall be produced and sold only on the West Coast of Malaysia

Bross & Partners has experience in trademark opposition, counter-opposition and trademark cancellation due to non-use in Vietnam including those in negotiating and obtaining letter of consent. Should you have needs, please contact us at Email: vinh@bross.vn; Mobile: 0903 287 057; WeChat: Vinhbross2603; WhatsApp: +84903287057; Skype: vinh.bross; Zalo: +84903287057.

 

Bross & Partners, an intellectual property renowned law firm founded in 2008, regularly ranked as top tier by Managing Intellectual Property (MIP), World Trademark Review (WTR1000), Legal 500 Asia Pacific, AsiaLaw Profiles, Asia Leading Lawyers, Asia IP and Asian Legal Business (ALB). With many years of outstanding experience and distinctive expertise, Bross & Partners can help clients effectively protect or defend in complex intellectual property disputes in Vietnam and overseas.

 

 



[1] Four ways that can help you overcome refusal of protection for a trademark application include:

(a) Proving that the rejected mark is not similar to a cited mark (pre-existing mark); or

(b) Seeking to acquire the cited mark and get such assignment recorded in one’s name; or

(c) Revoking the validity of the cited mark for the reason of non-use in commerce from the date of registration (typically 3 years).

(d) Negotiating to obtain a Letter of Consent from the cited mark owner

[2] See China's views on the Letter of Consent available in the article "The Supreme Court of China to engage in overruling lower courts’ judgments and CNIPA’s decisions on denial of Letter of Consent in support of overcoming trademark protection refusal in China ", available at the link: http://bross.vn/newsletter/ip-news-update/The-Chinese-Supreme-People%E2%80%99s-Court-to-Engage-in-Overruling-Lower-Courts%E2%80%99-Judgments-and-CNIPA%E2%80%99s-Decisions-on-Denial-of-Letter-of-Consent-in-Support-of-Overcoming-Trademark-Protection-Refusal-in-China

 

Bookmark and Share
Relatednews
Khi nào không thể hoặc không nên đăng ký thương hiệu ra nước ngoài theo Hệ thống Madrid?
ĐĂNG KÝ QUỐC TẾ NHÃN HIỆU THEO HỆ THỐNG MADRID
Cấm người khác dùng tên người nổi tiếng đăng ký nhãn hiệu ở Trung Quốc được không?
Trung Quốc: Tranh tụng bản quyền nhiều nhất thế giới và vai trò đặc biệt của hệ thống Tòa chuyên trách sở hữu trí tuệ
Nhật Bản bỏ thu phí 2 lần đối với nhãn hiệu quốc tế theo Hệ thống Madrid
Cambodia to Strictly Watch the Timely Submission of Affidavit of Use/Affidavit of Non-use for a Registered Trademark
Trung Quốc sẽ tiếp tục sửa Luật nhãn hiệu 2019 với trọng tâm chống “đăng ký nhãn hiệu có dụng ý xấu”
Căn cứ từ chối tuyệt đối cần tránh khi lựa chọn thương hiệu để nộp đơn đăng ký nhãn hiệu ở Trung Quốc
Campuchia siết chặt nghĩa vụ nộp bằng chứng sử dụng đối với nhãn hiệu đã đăng ký
Bross & Partners as a Contributor to the Chambers Trademarks and Copyright 2024 Global Practice Guide
Founding Partner Le Quang Vinh continously named in the 2023 A-List by Asia Business Law Journal

Newsletter
Guidelines
Doing business in Vietnam
Intellectual Property in Vietnam
International Registrations
Copyright © Bross & Partners All rights reserved.

         
Cửa thép vân gỗcua thep van go