≡ Menu

Odds and Ends

- According to a report by whatever they’re calling the Finance Ministry nowadays, an IMF index says Japan is even more exposed to external shocks than Korea. Just in case anyone was thinking of playing the currency swap card.

- A Korean bar is paying damages to Chanel for using its name.

- Jesus, another knife attack in Suwon leaves four injured. Maybe the Chosun has a point.

About the author: Just the administrator of this humble blog.

  • hamel

    I’ve seen a feew massage establishments named 샤넬. I wonder if Chanel’s lawyers are investigating them too…

  • red sparrow

    Is there a luxury brand whose name and logo HASN’T been ripped off by Korean bars/business clubs?

  • Q

    No one could use ‘apple’ without paying the patent hydra/troll ‘Apple’. It might be lucrative to register bunches of common nouns into patency.

  • jkitchstk

    More companies entangled in global patent rows
    http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2012/08/123_117773.html
    “The number of international patent lawsuits involving Korean firms has increased by over 80 percent in the past two years, according to official figures Monday, emerging as a new threat to their efforts to go global…
    “There have been a growing number of patent lawsuits involving domestic firms in the past three years,” said Choo Hyung-joon, manager of KIPPA. “We believe the number is much higher if cases in Japan and Europe where we couldn’t conduct a full-scale survey, were included…”
    “It’s hard to estimate the portion of patent lawsuits by NPEs, but we believe that about half of all the patent legal disputes against domestic firms are now instigated by them,” Choo said.”

  • Arghaeri

    I’ve seen a feew massage establishments named 샤넬. I wonder if Chanel’s lawyers are investigating them too…

    Why is Shanel tademarked too :-)

  • Arghaeri

    No one could use ‘apple’ without paying the patent hydra/troll ‘Apple’. It might be lucrative to register bunches of common nouns into patency.

    People can and do, most famously the Beatles. Now using it with the trademark Apple symbol maybe not.

  • brier
  • DLBarch

    It sounds like the dude who owned the Chanel bar was awarded damages based on his failure to contest the complaint, not on the actual merits of the lawsuit.

    The funny thing is that, if I recall correctly, even the owners of famous brands in Korea still have to show what’s called “likelihood of confusion” to prevail in a trademark infringement case.

    So had this thing actually gone to trial, it would appear that Chanel would still have had to show that an ordinary consumer would more likely than not have mis-associated the Chanel Business Club with the actual Chanel fashion house.

    Good luck with that.

    As for the claim that the club “damaged Chanel’s image by using its trademarks for services seen as negative,” ya just gotta love French understatement.

    Remember guys, Chanel is what you give your mistresses, not where you go to meet them!

    DLB

  • CactusMcHarris

    #8,

    I didn’t think you had any adjosshi in ya, David!

    And I’ll have you know I give my wife ol #5 as part of her Christmas stocking treats.

  • seoulmilk

    the chanel case has nothing to do with consumer confusion. chanel was trying to prevent dilution of the chanel mark.

    all those businesses, e.g. karoake, room salons, massages, hair salons, etc., infringing on name brands are being sued or threatened with litigation all the time. most settle for a fraction of what was awarded to chanel and simply change their business names.

  • red sparrow

    If a bar steals Chanel’s (or anyone else’s) name and logo, it is clearly an attempt to give itself a luxury image with a link to the brand. It is juvenile and feeble-minded but nonetheless. A judge would have to be willfully dishonest and ignorant to not see it as such.

    And it was not so long ago that the average Korean consumer was sophisticated enough to know the difference. But from what I have seen over the past decade or so (at least in downtown Seoul) is fewer and fewer bars/karaoke lounges/business rooms are calling themselves Rolex, BMW, Ferrari, Chanel, Bulgari, etc.

  • seoulmilk

    the average korean consumer is sophisticated enough to know the difference. and you are seeing less and less businesses infringing on the name brands in seoul. unfortunately, lot of businesses outside of seoul are still copying the brand names/logo as their business name.

  • Arghaeri

    If a bar steals Chanel’s (or anyone else’s) name and logo, it is clearly an attempt to give itself a luxury image with a link to the brand. It is juvenile and feeble-minded but nonetheless. A judge would have to be willfully dishonest and ignorant to not see it as such.

    Why would anyone have exclusive right to a common name. Are you suggesting no one can name their bar, Red Bar or Sparrow bar just because its using your name?

  • Arghaeri

    Its rare to see exclusive use, name often has to have some distinguishing trademark. See Apple they can protect against “passing off” use of “apple” for computer products and they can sue against trademark abuse for use of their distintive trademarked apple insignia, but they can’t sue someone merely for say calling a bar the Apple Bar.