This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.
530
ment 031
CHINA TRADE.
CONFIDENTIAL
[March 27.]er
18 MAY 08!
SECTION 4.
[10449]
(No. 113.) Sir,
No. 1.
Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received March 27.)
Peking, March 4, 1908. WITH reference to my despatch No. 92 of the 26th ultimo, and to Sir Claude MacDonald's despatch of the 18th January, on the subject of Japanese infringements of British trade-marks in China, I have the honour to inclose a copy of a despatch from His Majesty's Consul-General at Shanghae, in which the view is expressed that the conclusion of a Convention with Japan for the mutual protection of trade-marks in China will not result in preventing the use of imitated marks unless the Japanese law is amended in such a way as to withhold from trade-marks which have been imitated from those of foreign manufacturers the privileges now accorded by the act of registration in Japan.
A copy of this inclosure is being sent also to His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokio.
I have, &c. (Signed)
J. N. JORDAN.
(No. 23.) Sir,
Inclosure in No. 1.
Consul-General Sir P. Warren to Sir J. Jordan.
Shanghae, February 25, 1908. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge receipt of your despatch of the 6th instant, inclosing a copy of a communication addressed to Sir Edward Grey by His Majesty's Ambassador at Tôkið, on the subject of trade-mark imitations by Japanese in Japan and China, and the legal remedies available against them. You request me to furnish you with my views as to the results in China of a Convention concluded between Great Britain and Japan in the existing circumstances and on the lines proposed.
It would appear from His Majesty's Ambassador's despatch that, in the present state of the law in Japan, even though a Convention on the lines proposed were signed for the mutual protection of trade-marks, most of the imitations by Japanese of British trade-marks which have been observed by His Majesty's Consuls in China would not necessarily cease. If this is to be the result of a Convention, it is difficult to see what useful purpose it will serve. With the object, no doubt, of enforcing the registration in Japan of foreign trade-marks, the Japanese laws on the subject have been drawn up in such terms as to give every encouragement to Japanese subjects to pirate the trade-marks of foreign manufacturers who neglect to register their marks themselves. The natural result has been to incite their manufacturers to dishonesty, and to set up the abuses of which complaint is now made. It appears to me that, until the present laws are amended in conformity with fair dealing and the provision in Article II, clause 3, that trade-marks in regard to which apprehension exists that they will deceive people cannot be registered, not only enforced in its widest sense but given a retrospective effect, no Convention should be entered into. In the existing circumstances, it would legalize rather than put an end to the present abuses, and would practically amount, in many cases, to the confiscation of valuable British property for the benefit of Japanese competitors.
There is one other objection to a Convention in the present state of the law to which I must also allude. "It is the lack of confidence in the impartiality of Japanese Judges which prevails amongst British merchants. Unfortunately in trade-mark cases there appears to be considerable justification for such distrust, for experience has shown that little or no satisfaction can be obtained from Japanese Courts, attributing to this cause the hesitation shown by British merchants in finding and prosecuting trade-mark pirates in Japan His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokio is undoubtedly right, and, as long as Japanese law and Japanese public opinion fail to
[2889 dd-4]
}
:
!
This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.
530
ment 031
CHINA TRADE.
CONFIDENTIAL
[March 27.]er
18 MAY 08!
SECTION 4.
[10449]
(No. 113.) Sir,
No. 1.
Sir J. Jordan to Sir Edward Grey.-(Received March 27.)
Peking, March 4, 1908. WITH reference to my despatch No. 92 of the 26th ultimo, and to Sir Claude MacDonald's despatch of the 18th January, on the subject of Japanese infringements of British trade-marks in China, I have the honour to inclose a copy of a despatch from His Majesty's Consul-General at Shanghae, in which the view is expressed that the conclusion of a Convention with Japan for the mutual protection of trade-marks in China will not result in preventing the use of imitated marks unless the Japanese law is amended in such a way as to withhold from trade-marks which have been imitated from those of foreign manufacturers the privileges now accorded by the act of registration in Japan.
A copy of this inclosure is being sent also to His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokio.
I have, &c. (Signed)
J. N. JORDAN.
(No. 23.) Sir,
Inclosure in No. 1.
Consul-General Sir P. Warren to Sir J. Jordan.
Shanghae, February 25, 1908. I IIAVE the honour to acknowledge receipt of your despatch of the 6th instant, inclosing a copy of a communication addressed to Sir Edward Grey by His Majesty's Ambassador at Tôkið, on the subject of trade-mark imitations by Japanese in Japan and China, and the legal remedies available against them. You request me to furnish you with my views as to the results in China of a Convention concluded between Great Britain and Japan in the existing circumstances and on the lines proposed.
It would appear from His Majesty's Ambassador's despatch that, in the present state of the law in Japan, even though a Convention on the lines proposed were signed for the mutual protection of trade-marks, most of the imitations by Japanese of British trade-marks which have been observed by His Majesty's Consuls in China would not necessarily cease. If this is to be the result of a Convention, it is difficult to see what useful purpose it will serve. With the object, no doubt, of enforcing the registration in Japan of foreign trade-marks, the Japanese laws on the subject have been drawn up in such terms as to give every encouragement to Japanese subjects to pirate the trade-marks of foreign manufacturers who neglect to register their marks themselves. The natural result has been to incite their manufacturers to dishonesty, and to set up the abuses of which complaint is now made. It appears to me that, until the present laws are amended in conformity with fair dealing and the provision in Article II, clause 3, that trade-marks in regard to which apprehension exists that they will deceive people cannot be registered, not only enforced in its widest sense but given a retrospective effect, no Convention should be entered into. In the existing circumstances, it would legalize rather than put an end to the present abuses, and would practically amount, in many cases, to the confiscation of valuable British property for the benefit of Japanese competitors.
There is one other objection to a Couvention in the present state of the law to which I must also allude. "It is the lack of confidence in the impartiality of Japanese Judges which prevails amongst British merchants. Unfortunately in trade-mark cases there appears to be considerable justification for such distrust, for experience has shown that little or no satisfaction can be obtained from Japanese Courts. attributing to this cause the hesitation shown by British merchants in finding and prosecuting trade-mark pirates in Japan His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokio is undoubtedly right, and, as long as Japanese law and Japanese public opinion fail to
[2889 dd-4]
In
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.