JPO-sponsored Fellowship Study-cum-Research

1. JPO-sponsored Fellowship Study-cum-Research International Trademark Registration under Madrid Protocol and Madrid Agreement Vietnam’s Approach Presented by Nguyen Thi Ngoc BICH Supervised by Prof. Yoshitoshi TANAKA Tokyo, March 2008

2. Contents (general) • Introduction • Overview of the Madrid System • International application originated from VN • Examination of the International Application • Recommendation

3. Contents (1): Introduction • Reasons for this Study • Objective • Scope of study • Methodology

4. Why this theme? • Essential for Vietnam SMEs • VN’s integration into international economy • Need to have own trademark as the distinctive image of goods/services • Current situation of using Madrid Agreement • Benefit from the cost-effective and time-saving trademark registration abroad

5. Facts and Figures • Madrid Members • The number of Madrid Members: increased (82 as of 28/01/2008) • Most countries prefer Protocol than Agreement nowadays (75) • More advantages for TM registration under Madrid System • More advantages provided by Protocol than Agreement

6. Facts and Figures • Int’l TM Registration in Madrid Members as countries of origin • Domestic applicants in less-developed countries like VN: reserved to use international registration system • There are factors inherent Vietnamese users to use Madrid system • What are the possible measures to encourage utilization of Madrid system for international registration of marks

7. Facts and Figures • Int’l TM Registration in Madrid Members as designated countries • National IP Offices face to the increasing number of TM applications: time limit, communication, etc. • Need to apply the suitable measures to ensure the effectiveness of examination process

8. Facts and Figures • VN – JP practices on Madrid system • Japan is a good model on the implementing Madrid system for Vietnam to learn and follow * Including comparative studies covering different countries (US, PLP, MN, etc.) • Similar IP system for TM examination/registration in VN and JP

9. Findings, Hypothesis & Study Domestic applicants in LDC like VN: reserved to use Madrid system NOIP faces to the increasing number of TM applications VN-JP Similarity of IP system & JP’s pioneer in implementation HYPOTHESIS: HYPOTHESIS: HYPOTHESIS: • Factors inherent Vietnamese to use Madrid • Possible measures to encourage utilization of system for int’l registration • Need to apply suitable measures to ensure the effectiveness of examination process • Japan – a good model to follow Study Theme: INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION OF TRADEMARK UNDER MADRID SYSTEM – VIETNAMESE APPROACH IN COMPARATIVE STUDY WITH JAPANESE PRACTICES

10. What’s study • Vietnam approach: • Easy-to understand • Effective-to use FOR VIETNAMESE • Madrid System: • Madrid Agreement • Madrid Protocol • Vietnam approach LIVE USEFULL Comparative study Comment for actions • Recommendation: • Facilitate the implementation

11. Methodology COLLECT INFORMATION/STATISTICS • Study on legislations for TM registration and Madrid system: • WIPO, JP, VN: website, laws & regulation, guidelines • Prior researches on Madrid system in JP, US, CN, PLP, MN, etc. • Collect information/statistics: • WIPO, NOIP, JPO: website, annual report • Other publication: books, magazines, newsletters, etc. RAISE AND PROVE HYPOTHESIS • Questionnaires, Interview • Industries, IP attorneys, Examiners • Comparative Analysis on trademark system in JP and VN PROVIDE INFORMATION USEFUL FOR VIETNAMESE • Principle information • On Madrid system • JP practices as model • Comments/Recommendation • Improve public awareness • Enhance effectiveness of system

12. VN- originated Appl. Comments/ Re- commendation Introduction Examination by National Office Overview on Madrid system Scope of study

13. Contents (2) • Introduction • Minimum Requirements • General Procedure • Advantage and Disadvantage • Difference between Madrid Agreement & Madrid Protocol • Statistic data • Comparative analysis (JP-VN) Overview of Madrid system

14. Overview of the Madrid system • Introduction of system • Trademark registration/protection abroad: • National route • International route • VN as member of Madrid system • Agreement: 8th March 1949 • Protocol: 11th July 2006 • WIPO as administration agency • 82 members of Madrid system (28th January 2008)

15. Overview of the Madrid system • Minimum Requirements of Int’l application • Applicants: • Basic concept • Interpretation under domestic legislation • Basic application/registration • Application • Designation • “Safeguard clause” • Article 9sexies: Agreement • Amendment (October 2007): Protocol (valid fr. 01/09/2008) • Language • Priority claims • Fees

16. Overview of the Madrid system • General Procedure • Filing int’l application: via Office of Origin (OO) • Actions by OO • Receive of application • Preliminary check • Certify international date & conformity • Transfer application • Action by International Bureau (IB) • Formality check • Registration/Publication • Notify designation

17. Overview of the Madrid system • Advantages • Trademark owners • Simplicity • Financial savings • Single transaction for post-registration procedures • Examination: NO NEWS is GOOD NEWS • Trademark offices • No examination on formality; classification • Reduce backlog of pending applications • Fee collection from IB

18. Overview of the Madrid system • Disadvantages • Trademark owners • Lack of prior consultancy on local requirements • Similarity search at WIPO website: not available • Dependence of basic application/registration • Trademark offices • As designated office: increase applications, time limit, lack of facilities, automation system, etc. -> Substantial burden for examiners • As office of origin: strict time limit, detailed guidance

19. Overview of the Madrid system • Difference between Agreement and Protocol • Basic requirements • Language • Safeguard clause • Remedy to central attack • Refusal period • Validity • Fees structure • Flexibility for choice of OO • Membership

20. Statistic data & comparative analysis • VN-originated international application (Source: WIPO (upto 2006), NOIP (2007) Low rate of use of Madrid system by Vietnamese

21. Statistic data & comparative analysis • Factors of infrequent use of Madrid by VN-ese • Factors associated with the Madrid system • Precondition under Madrid Agreement: Basic Registration • Memberships of Madrid Agreement: EU, JP, USA – major markets for VN-ese SMEs are not members • Factor inherent to Vietnamese users • Low demand on world-wide TM protection • Lack of sufficient knowledge and experience on the Madrid procedure • High filing cost: single class = three-classes application • Difficulty to transfer fees abroad

22. Statistic data & comparative analysis • VN-originated international application Rate of use of Madrid system by Vietnamese becomes INCREASED for last five years: nearly 80% (Source: WIPO (upto 2006), NOIP (2007)

23. Madrid Protocol – chance for VN-ese users to overcome inherent obstacles • Basic application: claiming priority • TM registration in potential market: JP, USA • Demand on protection extension in consistence with product/service expansion • Support from Government, professional associations • Consideration of filing cost as a reasonable investment to successful business

24. Statistic data & comparative analysis • Tendency of frequent use of Madrid Protocol by VN-ese users (2006 – 2007) * Source: WIPO (2006), NOIP (2007)

25. Statistic data & comparative analysis • Trademark applications in Vietnam (2000 – 2007) • In 2007: total 31994 applications (27074 national, 4920 int’l) • Top 5 countries of TM holders: USA, DE, FR, CH & JP • Int’l applications designating Vietnam (2000 – 2007) • Upto Feb. 2008: total 58690 int’l applications (56836 applications under Agreement; 1853 applications under Protocol) • 2007: int’l applications increased by 42.5% to 2006 • Potential top countries of int’l TM holders: USA, EU, DE, CH, FR & JP • Capacity at NOIP • Examiners: responsible for both national & int’l • Out-sourcing search: NO • Examination Guidelines: included in the general provisions on IP

26. Statistic data & comparative analysis • Japan’s preparation for accession to Madrid Protocol • Systematic revisions in trademark laws 1999 • Researches & studies on advantages/disadvantages of the system and possible measures for effective implementation • Introduction, guidance on filing procedures by JPO, professional associations • Training materials & handbooks on Madrid Protocol and its regulations • Int’l applications originating from Japan (2000 – 2006) • Upto Feb. 2008: 4266 int’l applications (2007: 1016 applications) • Number of applications has been on a rise • Number of designated states: took a downward

27. Statistic data & comparative analysis • Factors of infrequent use of Madrid by Japanese* • Factors associated with the Madrid system • The central attack • Memberships: Asian countries is concerned • The basis requirements (basis application, TM unity): restraint • Replacement of registered TM right by int’l Reg.: Doubt • The procedure for remitting the filing fee: Troublesome • The filing cost per application: High • Factor inherent to Japanese users • Lack of sufficient knowledge and experience on the procedure • Watch for filing trends of competitors • Negative response to system from IP Attorneys** • Custom to follow national route and TM management portfolio** * Source: “Problems facing Japanese users in using the Madrid system” Mituhisa ANDA, IIP Bulleting 2007 ** From interview and questionnaire to JP-ese industries, IP attorneys

28. Statistic data & comparative analysis • Int’l applications designating Japan (2000 – 2007) • Upto Feb. 2008: total 59142 int’l applications • 2007: int’l applications increased by 3.8% to 2006 • The 6th most designated country in 2007 • Capacity at JPO • Int’l TM Application Division and Examination Division specifically to handle Protocol applications: established • Computer system: improved • Trademark examiners specialized in examination: Yes • Out-sourcing search: Yes • Examination Manual/Guidelines: Yes • JPO’s effort to reduce the examination period

29. Contents (3) • Minimum Requirements • Contracting parties • Fees structures • Irregularities • Subsequent designation • Dependence & “central attack” • Extension for protection • Refusal • Opposition • Post-registration VN-originated Int’l TM Application

30. Minimum requirements • Applicants • VN-ese citizen: OK • VN-ese domiciles: OK • VN-ese businesses: OK • Overseas VN-ese:? • Foreigners own capital contribution to VN-ese entity: ? • Foreigners own shares in the VN stock market: ? • Branch of a foreign company: ? • Official interpretation • Detailed guidance • Requirements of IP law on applicant’s own products/services or legitimate trading activities: refrain applicant?

31. Minimum requirements • Basic application/registration • Co-ownership of basic application/registration • Different demand on int’l protection extension ? • Basic mark • Requirement on identicalness • Practice of amendment after filing national application • Official interpretation • Detailed guidance ? • Designated goods/services • Requirement on detailed list in the national application • No restriction in other countries ?

32. Minimum requirements • Language • Exclusively bound by Agreement FRENCH • Exclusively bound by Protocol • Both by Agreement & Protocol ENGLISH or FRENCH • Documents • Forms MM1; MM2 or MM3 • Form 06-DKQT in VN-ese • Others: • Copy of Basic application/registration • TM specimens • POA • MM17 (EU), MM18 (USA, SG, UK), etc.

33. Fees • Fees to IB • In CHF • Fees to NOIP • In VND * If no Individual Fees are applied

34. Irregularities in the int’l application • Remedied by NOIP • Communication • Prescribed form • Irregularities affecting the date of registration • Irregularities on entitlement to file appl. • Irregularities on date of receiving, conformity with the basic appl./reg. • Classification • Etc. • Official interpretation • Detailed guidance • Remedied by Applicant • Fees • Others than that remedied by NOIP

35. VN-originated international application • Registration, Notification, Publication • Understanding of concept “registration” • Refusal • Appeal • Through local attorney in contracting country • Subsequent designation • Forms MM4; 08-SDQT • Fees: to NOIP, to IB • Transformation the cancelled int’l application to national/regional application: within 3 months • Post-registration procedures

36. Content (4) • Examination by the International Bureau • Examination by the National Office • Comparative study on the substantive examination carried out by JPO and NOIP Examination of the Int’l TM Application

37. Examination by International Bureau

38. Examination by JPO & NOIP as Contracting Offices

39. Examination by JPP & NOIP as Contracting Offices

40. Content (5) • Improvement of public awareness • Facilitate the implementation of Madrid system Recommendation

41. Improvement of public awareness • Seminar, workshop and conference • Translation of treaties and regulations, publication • Booklet, articles, handbook • IP library • Website on Madrid procedure and practice • Support programs to SMEs

42. Facilitate the implementation of Madrid system • International Trademark Division • Examination Guidelines and/or Madrid implementation rules • Outsource searching services • E-filing and e-communication • Evaluation of implementation: problems--solutions

43. Acknowledgement THANK YOU for YOUR ATTENTION!