Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • B1D Fredco Manufacturing Corporation v. President and Fellows of Harvard College

    Uploaded by

    Mharey
    1K views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Harvard University, finding that Fredco Manufacturing Corporation's use of the trademark "Harvard" infringed on Harvard University's trade name rights. While Fredco claimed prior use of the mark in the Philippines, the Court held that as the original owner of the "Harvard" trade name since 1639, Harvard University was entitled to protection of the name in the Philippines under the Paris Convention, regardless of registration. Fredco's use of "Harvard" coupled with claims of origin in Cambridge, Massachusetts suggested a false connection to Harvard University. Therefore, Fredco's registration of the mark should not have been allowed as it did not have affiliation with Harvard University.

    Original Description:

    INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW CASE

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Harvard University, finding that Fredco Manufacturing Corporation's use of the trademark "Harvard" infringed on Harvard University's trade name rights. While Fredco claimed prior use of the mark in the Philippines, the Court held that as the original owner of the "Harvard" trade name since 1639, Harvard University was entitled to protection of the name in the Philippines under the Paris Convention, regardless of registration. Fredco's use of "Harvard" coupled with claims of origin in Cambridge, Massachusetts suggested a false connection to Harvard University. Therefore, Fredco's registration of the mark should not have been allowed as it did not have affiliation with Harvard University.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views2 pages

    B1D Fredco Manufacturing Corporation v. President and Fellows of Harvard College

    Uploaded by

    Mharey
    The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Harvard University, finding that Fredco Manufacturing Corporation's use of the trademark "Harvard" infringed on Harvard University's trade name rights. While Fredco claimed prior use of the mark in the Philippines, the Court held that as the original owner of the "Harvard" trade name since 1639, Harvard University was entitled to protection of the name in the Philippines under the Paris Convention, regardless of registration. Fredco's use of "Harvard" coupled with claims of origin in Cambridge, Massachusetts suggested a false connection to Harvard University. Therefore, Fredco's registration of the mark should not have been allowed as it did not have affiliation with Harvard University.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    B1D

    Fredco Manufacturing Corporation v. President and Fellows of Harvard College


    G.R. No. 185917, 1 June 2011

    Facts:

    Fredco Manufacturing Corporation (Fredco) filed before the Bureau of Legal Affairs of
    the Philippine Intellectual Property Office a Petition for Cancellation of Registration No. 56561
    issued to President and Fellows of Harvard College (Harvard University) for the mark “Harvard
    Veritas Shield Symbol” under classes 16, 18, 21, 25 and 28.

    Fredco claimed that Harvard University had no right to register the mark in class 25,
    since its Philippine registration was based on a foreign registration. Thus, Harvard University
    could not have been considered as a prior adopter and user of the mark in the Philippines.
    Fredco explained that the mark was first used in the Philippines by its predecessor-in-interest
    New York Garments as early as 1982, and a certificate of registration was issued in 1988 for
    goods under class 25. Although the registration was cancelled for the non-filing of an affidavit of
    use, the fact remained that the registration preceded Harvard University’s use of the subject mark
    in the Philippines.

    Harvard University, on the other hand claimed that the name and mark “Harvard” was
    adopted in 1639 as the name of Harvard College of Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. The marks
    “Harvard” and “Harvard Veritas Shield Symbol,” had been used in commerce since 1872, and
    was registered in more than 50 countries.

    The Bureau of Legal Affairs ruled in favor of Fredco and ordered the cancellation of
    Registration No. 56561. It found Fredco to be the prior user and adopter of the mark “Harvard”
    in the Philippines. On appeal, the Office of the Director General of the Intellectual Property
    Office reversed the BLA ruling on the ground that more than the use of the trademark in the
    Philippines, the applicant must be the owner of the mark sought to be registered. Fredco, not
    being the owner of the mark, had no right to register it.

    The Court Appeals affirmed the decision of the Office of the Director General. Fredco
    appealed the decision with the Supreme Court. In its appeal, Fredco insisted that the date of
    actual use in the Philippines should prevail on the issue of who had a better right to the mark.

    Issue:

    Whether or not respondent’s trade name is infringed.


    Held: 

    Yes. Fredco’s use of the mark “Harvard,” coupled with its claimed origin in Cambridge,
    Massachusetts, obviously suggests a false connection with Harvard University. On this ground
    alone, Fredco’s registration of the mark “Harvard” should have been disallowed. Indisputably,
    Fredco does not have any affiliation or connection with Harvard University, or even with
    Cambridge, Massachusetts. Fredco or its predecessor New York Garments was not established in
    1936, or in the U.S.A. as indicated by Fredco in its oblong logo.

    Under Philippine law, a trade name of a national of a State that is a party to the Paris
    Convention, whether or not the trade name forms part of a trademark, is protected “without the
    obligation of filing or registration.” “Harvard” is the trade name of the world famous Harvard
    University, and it is also a trademark of Harvard University. Under Article 8 of the Paris
    Convention, as well as Section 37 of R.A. No. 166, Harvard University is entitled to protection
    in the Philippines of its trade name “Harvard” even without registration of such trade name in the
    Philippines. This means that no educational entity in the Philippines can use the trade name
    “Harvard” without the consent of Harvard University. Likewise, no entity in the Philippines can
    claim, expressly or impliedly through the use of the name and mark “Harvard,” that its products
    or services are authorized, approved, or licensed by, or sourced from, Harvard University
    without the latter’s consent.

    You might also like