Taipei Sinfonietta & Philharmonic Orchestra prevails in trademark opposition case

　Taipei Sinfonietta & Philharmonic Orchestra (hereinafter “TSPO”) filed a trademark opposition with TIPO against Taipei Philharmonic Music & Culture Co., Ltd. (author’s unofficial translation; hereinafter “Taipei Philharmonic”), alleging that Taipei Philharmonic’s Chinese-character mark, “TPSO 交響樂團及圖” (namely, “TPSO Symphony Orchestra & Logo”) (hereinafter referred to as the “mark in dispute”) was highly similar to TSPO’s Chinese-character mark, “台北愛樂室內及管弦樂團及圖” (namely, “Taipei Sinfonietta & Philharmonic Orchestra & Logo”) and the mark “TSPO” (hereinafter referred to “TSPO’s marks”) and thus was likely to cause public confusion.   Following a review, TIPO ruled that the mark in dispute should be revoked.  Taipei Philharmonic filed an administrative appeal against the decision, but the appeal was dismissed.  Consequently, Taipei Philharmonic filed the present lawsuit.  Recently, the Supreme Administrative Court ruled against Taipei Philharmonic, confirming its defeat in this case.  

　According to the Supreme Administrative Court’s judgment, the IPC Court did not err in dismissing Taipei Philharmonic’s lawsuit. The first part of Subparagraph 11, Paragraph 1 of Article 30 of the Trademark Act clearly sets forth that “A trademark shall not be registered for being identical with or similar to another person’s well-known trademark or mark, and hence there exists a likelihood of confusion on the relevant public”.  Evidence shows that as early as 1992, TSPO’s concert program clearly indicated the “高音譜號設計圖” mark (namely, a treble clef design) and the designation of “台北愛樂室內及管弦樂團” (namely, “Taipei Philharmonic Orchestra”).  Also, TSPO’s concert programs used in 1994 and 1998 indicated the mark “台北愛樂室內及管弦樂團及圖” (namely, “Taipei Sinfonietta & Philharmonic Orchestra & Logo”).  Moreover, TSPO has been invited to perform on international stages on multiple occasions, has invited world-renowned musicians to Taiwan for cultural exchange and also cooperated with domestic non-profit organizations in performances.  In 2004, TSPO’s mark was also selected by TIPO for inclusion in the Cultural and Creative Industries Trademark Directory as one of the well-known trademarks in the field of music and performing arts (which was prior to its formal registration).  These facts demonstrate that before the filing date (March 12, 2021) of the mark in dispute, the Chinese-character mark, “台北愛樂室內及管弦樂團及圖” (namely, “Taipei Sinfonietta & Philharmonic Orchestra & Logo”) had already been widely recognized by relevant businesses and consumers as a well-known trademark in connection with music performance and concert services.

　Moreover, both the mark in dispute and TSPO’s “台北愛樂室內及管弦樂團及圖” (namely, “Taipei Sinfonietta & Philharmonic Orchestra & Logo”) incorporate a treble clef as a major design, and the English wording, “Taipei Sinfonietta & Philharmonic Orchestra” of the latter is likely to lead to the impression of an acronym formed from its initial letters, namely “TSPO”.  In this regard, a comparison between the mark in dispute and TSPO’s marks shows that these marks are similar in appearance, pronunciation, and concept, and the mark in dispute and the “TSPO” mark are highly similar.  In addition, TSPO’s marks possess distinctiveness and are well recognized among consumers.  Furthermore, the former representative of Taipei Philharmonic had served as the administrative manager of TSPO from 2014 to 2020, and hence, should have been aware of the existence of TSPO’s marks.  As such, it is difficult to regard such an application for registering a similar design as having been filed in good faith.  Additionally, the designated services of the mark in dispute are closely related to those covered by TSPO’s marks in relation to musical performances and concerts. In fact, there have been instances of actual consumer confusion. In this regard, there is a likelihood that the relevant public would mistakenly believe that the services provided under the respective trademarks originate from the same source or from related sources, thereby giving rise to confusion.  (Released 2026.01.15)  
/CCS