CO129-423 - Governor Sir May - 1915 [7-8] — Page 227

!

goode manufactured by British firms for sale by liquidated firms. The manufacturers are

beginning to work through new Agents and the Agents

(the wish to use marks on the goods manufactured for them. The Governor's proposal is one of non- interference. He wishes to abstain from giving any permission to use the trade-marks or from inter- fering with the use of the trade-marks, leaving the question of rights to be settled after the war between the parties claiming.

It seems to me that in dealing with this matter we have to consider whether we are winding up the enemy firms purely for military reasons, as we have alleged, or whether we are in fact doing it with a view to putting an end to German trade in the Colony after the war. I suppose that we must adhere to the first of these alternatives, and if so, it seems to me that we ought not to make any definite attempt to destroy these marks and at the same time we ought to protect the interests of the enemy owners in them so far as is possible. I think we must make a distinction between trade-marks which belong to enemies,

as that expression is used in our Proclamations, i.e. persons resinent in enemy

for carrying on bramy Wubat in Chine territory and trade-marks belonging to enemy subjects resident or carrying on business in H on whose non-enemy Fork

For businesses are being liquidated under the local Ordinances. With regard to the former any arrange- ment between a person resident or carrying on business in Hong Kong and the owner of the trade- mark is out of the question. In the case of the latter it-is-possible-or it may be possible for a person resident or carrying on business in the Colony to obtain the consent of the owner of the mark for its use by him, as appears to have been done in the cases mentioned in paragraphs 3 and 6 of

busines

or then than

china 4)

this despatch.

follows:-

The conclusions I have come to are as

224

(1) I agree that no legislation should be

passed prohibiting the use of trade-marks belonging to enemy subjects.

(2) that where someone in the Colony has

obtained the consent of the owner, not being an enemy within the meaning of the Proclamations, to the use of a trade-mark, neither the Government nor the liquidator of the owners businessheed object to the use of the mark provided that there is no

contravention of Section 6 of Ordinance 28

of 1915.

(3) that licences issued under this Section should make it clear that no permission to use trade-marks belonging to enemy owners is given or implied.

(4) that the use by persons other than the

owner and without the owners consent, of trade-marks belonging to persons resident or carrying on business in the Colony who se businesses are being liquidated under the local Ordinances, should be prevented by

a civil action or prosecution where possible. (5) that where such use cannot be prevented or

is sanctioned by the consent of the owner an attempt should, where possible, be made by the liquidator to recover compensation

for the use of the trade-mark for the benefit of the assets under his control.

I make a distinction between persons who are enemies within the meaning of the Proclamations

and

Y

this