My dear Bredon,
2.
Inclosure 2 in No. 1.
Mr. Jamieson to Deputy Inspector-General Bredon.
Shanghae, February 5, 1904.
At the meeting at my office on the 4th February, were present, Sir Charles Dudgeon, Messrs. Kinnear, Grundy, Wise, J. L. Scott, Thurg, Frank Maitland, W. D. Little, Stern, and J. McKie.
They were unanimously and strongly of opinion: firstly, that paragraph 1 of Rule 6 is not explicit enough, "approximately resembling" would be sufficient, if interpreted by a British Court, with its years of experience in such matters, but not when the interpretation rests in less skilled hands. They, therefore, advocate an adherence to the paragraph as redrafted by me. Secondly, they press for the insertion in my version of the paragraph of the following: After the first "already registered" insert 'or of marks, in regard to which, although not previously registered, right of user in China can be conclusively established.'
After the 2nd and 3rd "already registered" insert "or to which right of user applies."
They state that the number of unregistered "chops" in use is almost as great as that of registered marks, and, as they have enjoyed protection for them in the past, they claim the same for the future. You are of opinion that such "chops" can be registered under Rule 4. That I admit is possible, but the merchants insist that the 'chops' registration of which the registrar has the right to refuse according to paragraph 2 of Rule 6 - include "any chop or trade-mark covering foreign goods destined for sale in China."
The argument is the same as in the other case, protection for "open chops" not registered abroad. Paragraph 2 might be construed to mean that protection would only be extended to purely native "chops."
As regards Rule 7, a definition of classes and sub-classes is called for, and the complete elimination of paragraph 3, urgently requested. It is considered that the holder of a registered trade-mark, or "open chop," has the right to affix such mark anywhere he pleases, and that such right cannot be affected by an omission on his part to state beforehand in what particular way he is going to use the same.
Expression was given to a feeling that the scale of fees was too high throughout, and that in particular the fee for the inspection of register should be reduced. The fee in Great Britain is 1s. for every quarter-of-an-hour.
I may add, in conclusion, that I fully endorse the above, and I trust that you will be able to see your way to laying these weight-carrying representations of so influential a body of merchants before Sir Robert Hart.
3
He will have the right to refuse registration, or to cancel the registration, as a trade-mark, of any mark or name, or of any Chinese character, proved to have been already legitimately in use in China, previous to the making of these Rules, by any Chinese or foreign merchant, as a "chop" or trade-mark, covering native goods specially manufactured or prepared in China, or as a “chop" or trade-mark, covering foreign goods, destined for sale in China; also of any mark being a colourable imitation of the same; also of any mark, emblem or device, understood to be reserved for special Imperial or national use in China.
(NOTE. The words which depart from the text of the Rule, as proposed by the Customs, are underlined in red.)
217
I am, &c.
(Signed)
J. W. JAMIESON.
Commercial Attaché.
Inclosure 3 in No. 1.
Rule 6.-Proposed reading after the incorporation of the suggestions put forward by the British mercantile community.
The Registrar will have the right to refuse to register as a Chinese trade-mark, any mark, the registration of which seems to facilitate fraud in the marking of goods.
That is to say any mark, which is the same as, or in character resembles, any mark or "chop" - Chinese or foreign - already registered for the same class of goods, or of marks or "chops," in regard to which, although not previously registered, right of user can be conclusively established; or of any mark or "chop," which reproduces the leading feature, or features, of marks already registered, or to which right of user applies, or to which the same or like sounding trade designation is likely to be applied, in Chinese or any other language; or of any mark, of which the Chinese characters may be misread for those appearing on marks already registered, or to which right of user applies.
!
My dear Bredon,
2.
Inclosure 2 in No. 1.
Mr. Jamieson to Deputy Inspector-General Bredon.
Shanghae, February 5, 1904. AT the meeting at my office on the 4th February, were present, Sir Charles Dudgeon, Messrs. Kinnear, Grundy, Wise, J. L. Scott, Thurg, Frank Maitland, W. D. Little, Stern, and J. McKie.
They were unanimously and strongly of opinion: firstly, that paragraph 1. of Rule 6, is not explicit enough, "approximately resembling" would be sufficient, if interpreted by a British Court, with its years of experience in such matters, but not when the interpretation rests in less skilled hands. They, therefore, advocate an adherence to the paragraph as redrafted by me. Secondly, they press for the insertion in my version of the paragraph of the following: After the first "already registered " insert or of marks, in regard to which, although not previously registered, right of user in China can be conclusively established.'
After the 2nd and 3rd "already registered" insert "or to which right of user applies."
They state that the uumber of unregistered "chops" in use is almost as great as that of registered marks, and, as they have enjoyed protection for them in the past, they claim the same for the future. You are of opinion that such "chops can be registered under Rule 4. That I admit is possible, but the merchants insist that the 'chops "registration of which the registrar has the right to refuse according to paragraph 2 of Rule 6-include “ any chop or trade-mark covering foreign goods destined for sale in China."
The argument is the same as in the other case, protection for "open chops" not registered abroad. Paragraph 2 might be construed to mean that protection would only be extended to purely native "chops."
"
As regards Rule 7, a definition of classes and sub-classes is called for, and the complete elimination of paragraph 3, urgently requested. It is considered that the holder of a registered trade-mark, or open chop," has the right to affix such mark any where he pleases, and that such right can not be affected by an omission on his part to state beforehand in what particular way he is going to use the same.
Expression was given to a feeling that the scale of fees was too high throughout, and that in particular the fee for the inspection of register should be reduced. The fee in Great Britain is 1s. for every quarter-of-an-hour.
I may add, in conclusion, that I fully endorse the above, and I trust that you will be able to see your way to laying these weight-carrying representations of so influential a body of merchants before Sir Robert Hart.
3
He will have the right to refuse registration, or to cancel the registration, as a trade-mark, of any mark or name, or of any Chinese character, proved to have been already legitimately in use in China, previous to the making of these Rules, by any Chinese or foreign merchant, as a chop" or trade-mark, covering native goods specially manufactured or prepared in China, or as a “chop" or trade-mark, covering foreign goods, destined for sale in China; also of any mark being a colourable imitation of the same; also of any mark, emblem or device, understood to be reserved for special Imperial or national use in China.
(NOTE. The words which depart from the text of the Rule, as proposed by the Customs, are underlined in red.)
217
I am, &c.
(Signed)
J. W. JAMIESON.
Commercial Attache.
Inclosure 3 in No. 1.
Rule 6.-Proposed reading after the incorporation of the suggestions put forward by the British mercantile community.
CC
FC
THE Registrar will have the right to refuse to register as a Chinese trade-mark, any mark, the registration of which seems to facilitate fraud in the marking of goods.
That is to say any mark, which is the same as, or in character resembles, any mark or "chop"-Chinese or foreign-already registered for the same class of goods, or of marks or chops," in regard to which, although not previously registered, right of user can be conclusively established; or of any mark or chop," which reproduces the leading feature, or features, of marks already registered, or to which right of user applies, or to which the same or like sounding trade designation is likely to be applied, in Chinese or any other language; or of any mark, of which the Chinese characters may be misread for those appearing on marks already registered, or to which right of user applies.
100%
Italics in print.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.