6
(
7
Rule VI.-Classes of Goods.
The divisions and subdivisions are not framed in such a way as to commend the method to the Sub-Committee, in whose opinion a revision is most desirable, somewhat on the lines of the English classification, unless a better plan can be devised. This applies to the classification as a whole (Article 16).
Article 17. "A single trade-mark may be employed for a variety of goods, but such goods must all be of a similar class, and the registration of the trade-marks be applied for by the same person.'
"
This is altogether unreasonable. It debars the owner of a trade-mark which he uses on picce-goods from using the same design for, say, decorated trays, or flour, Further, in the event of his not requiring the mark for any but or soap, &c. piece-goods, its registration under another class by another applicant also becomes impossible.
The ground would be sufficiently covered by stating that "Applications for the registration of the same mark in different classes shall be treated as separate and distinct applications" (vide Sebastian, fol. 403, “Trade-marks Rules, 1890," Rule 13).
Rule VII.-Trade-marks Fees.
Articles 20-23. Although the fees are less than demanded in the former draft Regulations, 1904, the Sub-Committee is strongly of opinion that they are not in accordance with the Treaty, which stipulated for registration at reasonable fees, A comparison of the Chinese and English scales and their application will show that the Chinese is not less than three times greater than that of the English.
Special Trade-marks Rules.
Regulation II.--Trade-marks previously Registered in a Foreign Country.
Article 7 calls for the certificate of previous registration to be forwarded to the Trade-marks Bureau for inspection. As in practice it would not be possible to get original certificates here, it is important that a copy of certificate be sufficient, or a copy of notifications of registration.
Article 8. In the opinion of the Sub-Committee, the evidence of title afforded by a copy of certificate renders the expense and delay in getting a Chinese Consular certificate unnecessary, and this Article is therefore superfluous.
Article 12. The period of six months named in this Article seems to conflict with the period of one year named in Regulation I, Article 5.
Regulation respecting the Special Staff and Distribution of the Offices of the Trade-marks Bureau.
Having in view the fact that the trade-marks rights of British subjects may be jeopardized unless the staff and high officials in charge of the Trade-marks Bureau are fully qualified by experience for their posts, the Sub-Committee urge the importance of pressing for the appointment of a duly qualified Comptroller selected by the Patents Office, England, and located in Shanghae; further, that this post shall continue to be held by a British subject so long as British trade in China predominates. Failing this, appeal from the President of the Bureau to the Diplomatic Body in Peking should be accorded.
General Remarks.
The Sub-Committee, in the foregoing paragraphs, have criticized merely the Regulations as printed, but they also beg to draw attention to some of the points of importance which do not appear to be dealt with at all:-
Series of marks (section 66, Patents Act): The registration of marks in series at reduced fees is not provided for.
Registration of trade-marks in colours (section 67, Patent Act): Provision for this is also omitted.
Removal of registered mark from the register: Provision for this is also
omitted.
Certificate of refusal to register: Provision for this is also omitted.
In comparing the Regulations in question with the English Patents, &c., Act and Trade-marks Rules, so many omissions and ambiguities are brought to light that the Sub-Committee feel that it is necessary, in order to have a satisfactory Chinese Code, to omit no privilege or safeguard which is embodied in the English Acts and Regulations. Nor do the Sub-Committee consider such an attitude unreasonable, as in compiling their Regulations the Chinese Government have at their command the results of the combined experience of Western nations.
The Sub-Committee are of the opinion that it is a matter of importance that the Regulations provide that open marks, recognized as such in China prior to the Mackay Treaty or to the coming into force of the Trade-marks Regulations, shall remain open marks, and that registration of the same shall be refused.
31
It is also desired to point out that the former recommendations of the China Association regarding the recording of old marks (registered or not registered in a foreign country) at an initial fee of 10 taels plus 5 taels per mark has not been given effect to.
As regards the registration of foreign "hong names, also referred to on a previous occasion at a meeting of the China Association, the Sub-Committee is strongly of opinion that this should be granted in a definite clause.
In this connec- tion it may be asked whether Regulation 1, Article 2, is intended to cover this point. If so, it is not sufficiently clear.
In conclusion, the Sub-Committee venture to suggest that it might be well to wait until Japan has concluded Treaties with England and China on the subject of trade-marks before finally approving any Regulations put forward by China for intro- duction in her own dominions.
U
(Signed)
LESLIE J. CUBITT.
E. C. PEARCE. JAMES MCKIE.
133
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.