BBC ultimately successful in Russian “Top Gear” trademark saga

BBC最终在俄罗斯的“Top Gear”商标诉争中获得成功

Trademark “Top Gear” was registered in Russia by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) in 2015. Another trademark “TopGear” owned by a Russian company was registered in 2005 for similar services, but the Russian PTO did not find grounds for refusal, and registered BBC’s mark. The mark “TopGear” owned by the Russian entity was assigned to a Russian entrepreneur in 2016, who later also registered another mark “TopGear” for the same services in 2017.

“Top Gear”商标由英国广播公司(BBC)于2015年在俄罗斯注册。另一个由俄罗斯公司拥有的商标“TopGear”于2005年在类似的服务上注册，但是俄罗斯的PTO没有找到拒绝的理由，于是注册了BBC的商标。2016年，这家俄罗斯公司拥有的“TopGear”商标被转让给了一名俄罗斯企业家，他后来又于2017年在同样的服务注册了另一个“TopGear”商标。

Based on the application of the entrepreneur, the Russian PTO cancelled the “Top Gear” mark of BBC in 2018 on the ground of the existence of a similar mark with an earlier priority. The British company filed an appeal against the decision of the PTO with the Court for Intellectual Property arguing that the entrepreneur abused his trademark right. BBC also insisted that the only purpose of the assignment of the earlier mark and registration of a new trademark by the entrepreneur was to create an obstacle to BBC’s mark. The British company asked the Court that its trademark “Top Gear” should be maintained and also filed a cancellation application on non-use basis against the earlier mark of the entrepreneur.

根据该企业家的申请，2018年俄罗斯PTO取消了BBC的“Top Gear”标志，理由是存在一个享有优先权的类似商标。这家英国公司向知识产权法院提起上诉，反对PTO的决定，理由是这位企业家滥用了他的商标权。BBC还坚称，企业家转让早期商标和注册新商标的唯一目的是为BBC的商标制造障碍。这家英国公司请求法庭维持其“Top Gear”商标，并以不使用为由，对该企业家先前的商标提出了撤销申请。

The Court upheld the cancellation decision of the Russian PTO and held that neither the argument of BBC on the abuse of right by the entrepreneur nor the cancellation of the earlier mark could affect the judgement. The details of the case were also described in the article “Battle for BBC Top Gear trademark in Russia” published on Lexology on July 23, 2019.

法院维持了俄罗斯PTO的撤销决定，认为无论是BBC关于企业家滥用权利的争论，还是撤销之前的商标，都不会影响判决。2019年7月23日《Lexology》杂志发表的《英国广播公司Top Gear商标在俄罗斯的争夺战》一文中也描述了案件的细节。

The Presidium of the Court for Intellectual Property reviewed the case and held that the Court of appeal should have duly considered the cancellation of the earlier mark owned by the entrepreneur and taken into account BBC’s position that the entrepreneur had abused his trademark right. The Court clarified that based on the circumstances of the case an application for cancellation of a trademark can amount to an abuse of right. The Court further held that not all evidence provided by the claimant and not all facts of the case had been duly assessed. The judgement of the Court of appeal was set aside, and the retrial of the case was ordered.

知识产权法院主席团认为上诉法院应适当考虑取消该企业家先前拥有的商标，并考虑到BBC关于该企业家滥用其商标权的立场。法院澄清说，根据案件的具体情况，撤销商标的申请可以构成滥用权利。法院还认为，并不是对原告提供的所有证据和案件的所有事实都作了适当的评估。上诉法院的判决被撤销，并下令重审此案。

On October 28, 2019 the Presidium of the Court for Intellectual Property re-heard the case. The Court held that a cancellation action against a trademark constitutes a form of enforcement of the trademark right and could not have the only purpose of causing prejudice to another. The Court explained that the main aim of the trademark is to identify goods and services, and a trademark holder bears the obligation to use the mark. However, the mark “TopGear” was never used either by the Russian company that registered the mark “TopGear” or by the entrepreneur who purchased the mark, so the Court concluded that the entrepreneur had purchased the trademark with the earlier priority only with the aim of blocking the fair use of the “Top Gear” mark by BBC.

2019年10月28日，知识产权法院主席团再次审理此案。法院认为，对商标的撤销诉讼构成了商标权的一种实施形式，其唯一目的不可能是对他人造成损害。法院解释说，商标的主要目的是识别商品和服务来源，商标持有人有使用商标的义务。然而,无论是注册该商标的俄罗斯公司还是购买该商标的企业家都从未使用过“TopGear”商标。所以法院认为,企业家只购买享有优先权的商标,目的是阻止英国广播公司对“Top Gear”商标的合理使用。

BBC, in its turn, provided abundant materials in support of its position, including showing that the “Top Gear” mark was used since 1977, that it identified a very popular TV program awarded Emmy and other international prizes, that the TV show had been run in most of countries and was protected in the name of BBC in numerous countries.

BBC,又提供了丰富的材料支持其立场,包括显示其从1977年来已经使用“Top Gear”商标来自于一个获得艾美奖和其他众多国际奖项非常受欢迎的电视节目,电视节目已经在大多数的国家播放,在很多国家以英国广播公司的名义保护。

The Court furthermore found that the notoriety of BBC’s trademark had been attained prior to the date of purchase of the trademark by the entrepreneur, that the assignment of the trademark was in the absence of intent to use the trademark, that the entrepreneur willfully cancelled its trademark, and that the entrepreneur had been found in other cases to have abused his rights. The Court was thus persuaded that the only aim of filing a cancellation application against BBC’s trademark by the entrepreneur was to cause harm.

法院进一步发现,BBC商标的名声早于企业家购买商标的日期,商标转也缺乏使用的意图,企业家故意取消其商标,并且被发现在其他情况下滥用自己的权利。因此，法院认为，企业家申请撤销BBC商标的唯一目的是造成损害。

As a result, the Court held that the purchase of the trademark and the cancellation application constituted an abuse of right by the entrepreneur aiming to block the fair use of the mark by BBC. Consequently, the Court held that the cancellation application should not have been granted, and invalidated the decision of the Russian PTO.

因此，法院认为，该商标的购买和撤销申请构成了权利滥用，目的是阻止BBC对该商标的合理使用。因此，法院认为不应批准撤销申请，并宣布俄罗斯PTO的决定无效。

Source：www.lexology.com

Music website Genius sues Google and LyricFind over alleged lyric copyright infringement

音乐网站Genius起诉谷歌和LyricFind涉嫌侵犯歌词版权

Popular music website Genius is suing Google and its partner LyricFind for copyright infringement. The website stated that Google copied music lyrics from Genius without proper permission and is now demanding $50 million in restitution.

流行音乐网站Genius起诉谷歌及其合作伙伴LyricFind侵犯版权。该网站称，谷歌未经许可从Genius 上抄袭了歌词，并要求赔偿5000万美元。

The controversy first came into light when Genius told The Wall Street Journal that it had evidence that the lyrics were copied from their website. Genius said that they have been secretly watermarking lyrics with certain patterns. These same patterns later showed up on Google’s “information panel “confirming the company’s suspicion that Google has been copying their lyrics.

当Genius 向《华尔街日报》披露，他们有证据表明歌词是从他们的网站上抄袭的时候，这场争议才首次曝光。Genius表示，他们已经秘密地在歌词中添加了某些模式的水印。这些相同的模式后来出现在谷歌的“信息面板”上，证实了该公司怀疑谷歌一直在抄袭他们的歌词。

Defendants Google LLC and LyricFind have been caught red-handed misappropriating content from Genius’s website, which they have exploited —and continue to exploit— for their own financial benefit and to Genius’s financial detriment.

Genius认为被告谷歌有限责任公司和LyricFind的行为已经被发现，他们从 Genius的网站上盗用内容，并为自己的经济利益持续利用这些内容，造成了Genius的经济损失。

Google disputed the lawsuit and clarified its position by stating that the lyrics directly come from the content providers. The lyrics that you see in information boxes on Search come directly from lyrics content providers, and they are updated automatically as we receive new lyrics and corrections on a regular basis.

谷歌反驳了这一诉讼，并澄清了自己的立场，称歌词直接来自内容提供商。他主张在搜索信息框中看到的歌词直接来自内容提供商，当我们定期收到新歌词和更正时，它们会自动更新。

LyricFind, on the other hand, noted that their team sources the lyrics from various websites and since those websites also show the same watermarks, it’s possible that they “unknowingly sourced Genius lyrics”.All of examples were also available on many other lyric sites and services, raising the possibility that our team unknowingly sourced Genius lyrics from another location.We have not had any contact with Genius since June, and in fact, have not even been served with the complaint.

另一方面，LyricFind指出，他们的团队从不同的网站获取歌词，由于这些网站也显示了相同的水印，他们可能“不知不觉地获得了Genius的歌词”。所有的例子也可以在许多其他歌词网站和服务中找到，这增加了我们的团队在不知情的情况下从其他地方找到Genius歌词的可能性。自6月以来，我们从未与Genius有过任何联系，事实上，我们甚至从未收到过任何投诉。

While Genius does have sufficient evidence in its lawsuit which has over 1,000 examples of copied lyrics, the company still faces an uphill battle. This is due to the fact that Genius doesn’t own the lyrics either. The lyrics are originally owned by songwriters and producers. That said, the company can claim a breach of TOS by both Google and LyricFind since both the companies copied lyrics from the website without explicit permission from Genius.

虽然Genius公司在其诉讼中有足够的证据，有超过1000个抄袭歌词的例子，但该公司仍然面临着一场艰苦的战斗。这是由于Genius自身也不享有歌词的权利。歌词原本由词曲作者和制作人所有。也就是说，该公司可以声称谷歌和LyricFind都违反了服务条款，因为这两家公司在没有得到Genius明确许可的情况下从网站上抄袭了歌词。

Source：mspoweruser.com

European Union Joins Geneva Act of WIPO’s Lisbon Agreement, Enabling Entry into Force

欧盟加入《世界知识产权组织里斯本协定日内瓦文本》并使之生效

The Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications reached a milestone enabling its entry into force, as the European Union (EU) joined as the key fifth member of the international registration system that provides protection for names identifying the geographic origin of products such as coffee, tea, fruits, wine, pottery, glass and cloth.With the EU’s accession, the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement will enter into force for all its contracting parties on February 26, 2020.

《原产地名称和地理标志里斯本协定日内瓦文本》随着欧盟(EU)加入，成为国际注册系统的第五个关键成员而取得里程碑式成就并生效，该系统为标识产品地理产地的名称提供保护，如咖啡、茶、水果、葡萄酒、陶器、玻璃和布。随着欧盟的加入，《里斯本协议日内瓦文本》将于2020年2月26日对其所有缔约方生效。

“The EU’s accession enables entry into force of the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement, while greatly expanding the geographical coverage of this important registration system,” said Mr. Gurry. “As interest in the provenance of products grows, protection of appellations of origin and geographical indications benefits consumers demanding authenticity as well as producers seeking new ways to add value and distinguish their products in an increasingly global and competitive marketplace,” he added.

“欧盟的加入使《里斯本协定日内瓦文本》得以生效，同时极大地扩大了这一重要登记系统的地域范围，”居里说。他补充道:“随着人们对产品原产地的兴趣日益浓厚，原产地名称和地理标志的保护有利于要求真实性的消费者，也有利于生产者在日益全球化和竞争激烈的市场中寻求增加价值和区分产品的新方法。”

“The EU has invested more than twenty years’ work to develop a successful Geographical Indications policy, protecting the intellectual property of our farmers and food producers at home and abroad,” said Mr. Hogan. He added. “With this accession to the Geneva Act, we are reinforcing our commitment to promote food quality and traceability at the international level. This will bring clear benefits to our global partners as well as EU producers, consumers, growth and jobs.”

霍根说:“欧盟投入了20多年的努力来制定一项成功的地理标志政策，保护国内外农民和食品生产商的知识产权。”他补充说。“加入日内瓦法案后，我们加强了在国际层面上促进食品质量和可追溯性的承诺。这将为我们的全球合作伙伴以及欧盟的生产者、消费者、增长和就业带来明显的好处。”

The Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement, adopted May 20, 2015, allows the international registration of geographical indications and appellations of origin through a single registration procedure with WIPO, and permits the accession to the Act by certain intergovernmental organizations, including the European Union and the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI).

里斯本协定日内瓦文本,2015年5月20日被采用，允许通过WIPO一个单一的注册程序进行地理标志和原产品名称国际注册，并许可加入包括欧盟和非洲知识产权组织(OAPI)在内的特定的政府间组织制定的法案。

The foundational Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and their International Registration was originally concluded in 1958.Together, the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement and the Lisbon Agreement form what is commonly referred to as the “Lisbon System.”

《保护原产地名称及其国际注册的里斯本基本协定》最初于1958年缔结。《里斯本协定日内瓦文本》和《里斯本协议》共同构成了通常所说的“里斯本体系”。

Author:Geneva