4
This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
C123
25781
[June 29:]
16 JUL 08
SECTION 1.
ARTICLE 5.
Trade-marks duly registered in Japan [and actually used in Corea] prior to the enforcement of the laws and regulations mentioned in Article 1 shall be entitled in Corea, without any special procedure being taken, other act or procedure, to protection under the present Convention.
ARTICLE 6.
The present Convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications thereof shall be exchanged at Tokio as soon as possible.
It shall come into force ten days after such exchange of ratifications.
In witness whereof the above-mentioned Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Convention and affixed thereto their seals.
Done in duplicate, this
the
41st year of Meiji, corresponding to the 1908th year of the Christian era.
Amendment to Article 5 proposed by Foreign Office.
Trade-marks already registered in the United States and entitled under the laws thereof to protection in Corea shall be entitled to registration and protection under the present Convention, provided that they are of such a character as to permit of their registration in accordance with the laws and regulations to be enforced under such Convention, and provided also that the re-registration is effected within a period of six months after this Convention comes into force.
Proviso to Article 5 proposed by Embassy.
Provided that owners of marks duly registered in the United States prior to the enforcement of this Convention shall not be debarred from the use of such marks in Corea.
CHINA TRADE.
CONFIDENTIAL.
(22270)
No. 1.
Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received June 29.)
(No. 198.) Sir,
Peking, May 7, 1908.
ON the 3rd instant I received a telegram, copy of which is inclosed herewith, from His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokio, drawing my attention to a statement which had appeared in the "Times" with regard to his Excellency's despatch No. 10 of the 18th January to you on the subject of the protection of trade-marks.
I at once inquired of His Majesty's Consul-General at Shanghae, to whom the despatch had been referred for an expression of his opinion, as to whether he could throw any light on the subject.
Sir Pelham Warren replied that he had shown the despatch to the China Association in order to ascertain their views, but that he had informed them that the despatch was strictly confidential.
It is evident that any communication to the press on the subject must have been made through some member of the Association, and I have accordingly addressed a letter to Sir Pelham Warren, copy of which is also inclosed for your information, pointing out the gravity of the irregularity, and requesting him to inform the Association that they must guard against such conduct in future if they wish to be consulted on matters which interest them.
I did not mark my original despatch to the Consul-General "Confidential," as I thought it advisable to leave him at liberty to utilize the substance of it in obtaining local expert opinion, but the fact that Sir Pelham Warren informed the Association that the matter should be treated as confidential should have been sufficient to guard against the indiscretion which has occurred.
I have, &c.
(Signed)
J. N. JORDAN.
Declaration.
The Japanese Government engage that, pending further legislation, the broadest possible construction will be given to the provisions of the Japanese Trade-mark Law for the protection of the rightful owners of trade-marks by the rejection and cancellation of wrongful registrations.
Registration will be refused to all those marks which tend in any way to deceive the public, or which contain any misrepresentation as to the place of origin, quality, &c.
In the case of marks already registered, the same rule will be applied, and if any trade-mark is found, upon examination, to be designed to deceive or work fraud upon the public, it will be cancelled, no matter how long it may have been registered.
Any applicant for registration who finds that his mark has been imitated or wrongfully registered by another person may present evidence to prove that he is the original and rightful owner of such mark, and may seek judgment for the cancellation of such wrongful registration, and for such other relief as the circumstances may justify.
Inclosure 1 in No. 1.
Sir C. MacDonald to Sir J. Jordan,
(Telegraphic,)
Tokio, May 2, 1908.
MORRISON, in "Times," states on 26th February "China Association had sent to London a despatch from Sir C. MacDonald of 18th January of great importance."
This is my No. 10 to Foreign Office, of which copy was sent you.
Very grateful if you could tell me how Association obtained this despatch.
Inclosure 2 in No. 1.
Sir J. Jordan to Consul-General Sir P. Warren.
Dear Sir Pelham,
Peking, May 5, 1908.
MY telegram to you of the 3rd instant respecting the statement in the "Times" about the despatch from Tokio on trade-marks contains its own explanation.
The statement in the "Times" naturally did not commend itself to Sir Claude MacDonald, as it would convey the impression to the public at home that the press has access to official documents.
You were, of course, quite right to consult expert opinion and ascertain the views of the China Association on the question.
But they should have paid attention to your request that the matter should be treated as confidential, and they have been most indiscreet in talking about the matter outside in such a manner as to enable the "Times" correspondent to state that the Association itself had sent to London a copy of a despatch from Sir Claude MacDonald to the Secretary of State.
I think that, in the circumstances, it would be advisable to mention the matter to the Association.
You might explain privately that they are expected to treat all
[1815 ff-1]