Trade-mark Assignments and Their Effects on Opposition Proceedings

1996-01-01

TRADE-MARKASSIGNMENTSANDTHEIREFFECTSONOPPOSITIONPROCEEDINGS

by
DarioPietrantonio
LEGERROBICRICHARD,Lawyers
ROBIC,Patent&TrademarkAgents
CentreCDPCapital
1001Square-Victoria-BlocE–8
thFloor
Montreal,Quebec,CanadaH2Z2B7
Tel.:(514)9876242-Fax:(514)8457874
www.robic.ca-info@robic.com

ThematterofUnitedArtistsCorporationv.PinkPantherBeautyCorporation&
TheRegistrarofTradeMarks(yetunreported)FederalCourtofCanada,Trial
DivisionNo.T-3487-90,consistedofanappealbroughtbyUnitedArtists
Corporationpursuanttos.56oftheTrade-MarksActR.S.C.,c.T-13,froma
decisionrenderedbytheRegistrarofTradeMarksrejectinganoppositionto
registrationbytherespondentofthetrademarkTHEPINKPANTHER
(ApplicationNo.557,655)foruseinassociationwithwarespertainingtohair
careandbeautysuppliesaswellascertainservicesrelatedthereto.
TheappellantistheownerofthetrademarkTHEPINKPANTHER(Registration
No.152,831)aswellascertainotherdesignmarksdepictingapanther
cartoon,allofwhichareregisteredforuseinassociationwithwaresand
servicesrelatingtovariousaspectsoftheentertainmentindustry.The
trademarkTHEPINKPANTHERwasregisteredinCanadain1967byMirisch-
Geoffrey-D-Fandwassubsequentlytransferredonnumerousoccasions,the
appellanthavingbecomethemostrecentassigneeofthemarkinOctober
1994.
Althoughthejudgementessentiallyrejectedtherespondent’sapplication
afterhavingdeterminedthatthewidespreaduseofappellant’strade-mark
andthehighdegreeofresemblancebetweenthetwosubjectmarkswould
likelyleadtoconfusionamongstordinaryconsumersastothesourceofthe
waresandservicesassociatedtoeach,themostnoteworthyaspectofthe
court’sdecisionconcernedappellant’sstandingtoappealtheRegistrar’s
decisiontorejecttheopposition.
Theappellant’sstandingtoappealthedecisionbecameanissueduetothe
factthatnumerouscorporateentitiessuccessivelytookontherolesofowner
ofthetrademarkTHEPINKPANTHERandpartytotheoppositionproceedings.
Theoppositiontorespondent’sapplicationtoregisterthetrademarkTHEPINK
PANTHERwhichinitiatedtheproceedingswasfiledbyMGM/UA
CommunicationsCo.onApril4,1988.OnSeptember28,1988themarkwas

assignedtoUnitedArtistsPictures,Inc.,effectiveasofDecember1,1987
whichresultedinachangetotheidentityoftheopponent.TheRegistrar
renderedadecisiononOctober31,1990wherebyitrejectedtheappellant’s
opposition.
OnDecember31,1990,followingtheRegistrar’sdecision,MGM-Pathe
CommunicationsCo.whohadbeenassignedthemarkinJanuary1991,
effectiveNovember1,1990,filedanoticeofappealofsaiddecisiontothe
FederalCourtofCanada,TrialDivision.InOctober1994,priortothehearing
oftheappeal,thetrade-markwasassignedtoUnitedArtistsCorporationwho
filedapreliminarymotionrequestingthatitberecognizedasthenew
appellantintheproceedings.
TherespondentarguedthatUnitedArtistsCorporationdidnothavestanding
tobringtheappealbecauseitstwomostrecentpredecessorsintitlehadnot
expresslyassignedtheirrightsintheappealproceedingstoMGM-Pathe
CommunicationsCo.andUnitedArtistsCorporation,therebyonlyresultingin
theassignmentofthetrade-marksthemselves,nottheirrespectiverightsin
theproceedings.TherespondentlookedtoUnionCarbideCanadaLimited
v.Trans-CanadianFeedsLimitedetal.(1965),49C.P.R.7at26andAmstead
IndustriesInc.v.WireRopeIndustriesLtd.(1990),32C.P.R.(3d)334at339,to
supportitsposition.
Thecourtsetasidethesedecisionsbecausetheydealtwiththerightof
assigneesofpatentrightstoinitiateactionsasopposedtothecaseatbar
whichconcernedastatutoryappealcallingforthereviewofan
administrativedecision.
ThecourtthenturnedtoPrimaxComputerCorporationv.PrimaxElectronic
(U.S.A.)Inc.(1995),62C.P.R.(3d)75(F.C.T.D.)inwhichMr.JusticeDenault,of
thesamecourt,hadrefusedasimilarsubstitutionbasedonexactlythesame
typeofreasoningaswasbeingputforwardbyPinkPantherBeauty
Corporation.
ThecourtdistinguishedthePrimaxdecisionbasedonthefactthatthenotice
ofappealhadbeenfiledbyabankruptcorporation,notitsreceiver,andthat
thelanguageoftheassignmentwas”rathermorelimited”thanthatfoundin
thecaseatbar.Thisseconddistinguishingfactorwasbasedonthe
differencebetweenassigningthename”Primaxandalltrademark
registrations…”aswasthecaseinthePrimaxmatterandassigning”allright,
titleandinterest”inthemarkTHEPINKPANTHER.Mr.JusticeMacKayfound
thatthelatterwordingincludedthetransferofinterestintheopposition
proceedingswhiletheprecedingdidnot.

Thecourtmadeitabundantlyclearthroughoutitsdecisionthatitfeltthatan
“assigneeofallinterestsinatrade-mark”,whenpossible,shouldnotbe
precludedfrom”seekingtoprotectitsprimaryright,toexclusiveuse,merely
becausetheassignmentofrightswasgeneralanddidnotexpresslyprovidea
righttoopposeanotherparty’sapplication…”.Althoughthecourt’sreasoning
isnotanoutrightcontradictionofthePrimaxdecision,itclearlyadoptsa
differentperspectivetotheproblem.Aperspectivebasedonthenotionthat
thegeneralassignmentoftrade-markrightsshouldincludethetransferofthe
accessoryrightsneededtoenforceandprotecttheprimaryrightsconveyed
bytheassignment.
Unfortunatelyaclearstandardhasnotyetbeenestablishedandtherefore
thecourtsshallstillbecalledontodeterminewhetheranassignmentis
generalenoughtoalsoeffectivelytransfertherightsinproceedingsortoo
limitedtodoso.
Publishedat(1996),10W.I.P.R.208underthetitleTrade-MarkAssignmentsand
TheirEffectsonOppositionProceedings.

LEGERROBICRICHARD,1996.

ROBIC,ungrouped’avocatsetd’agentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommercevoué
depuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelledanstousles
domaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielsetmodèlesutilitaires;marquesdecommerce,marques
decertificationetappellationsd’origine;droitsd’auteur,propriétélittéraireetartistique,droits
voisinsetdel’artisteinterprète;informatique,logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;biotechnologies,
pharmaceutiquesetobtentionsvégétales;secretsdecommerce,know-howet
concurrence;licences,franchisesettransfertsdetechnologies;commerceélectronique,
distributionetdroitdesaffaires;marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;poursuite,litigeet
arbitrage;vérificationdiligenteetaudit;etce,tantauCanadaqu’ailleursdanslemonde.La
maîtrisedesintangibles.
ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademarkagentsdedicatedsince1892tothe
protectionandthevalorizationofallfieldsofintellectualproperty:patents,industrialdesigns
andutilitypatents;trademarks,certificationmarksandindicationsoforigin;copyrightand
entertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,neighbouringrights;computer,softwareand
integratedcircuits;biotechnologies,pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;tradesecrets,
know-how,competitionandanti-trust;licensing,franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-
commerce,distributionandbusinesslaw;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecution
litigationandarbitration;duediligence;inCanadaandthroughouttheworld.Ideaslive
here.
COPYRIGHTER
IDEASLIVEHERE
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLUL’INVENTER!
LAMAÎTRISEDESINTANGIBLES
LEGERROBICRICHARD
NOSFENÊTRESGRANDESOUVERTESSURLEMONDEDESAFFAIRES
PATENTER
R
ROBIC
ROBIC+DROIT+AFFAIRES+SCIENCES+ARTS
ROBIC++++
ROBIC+LAW+BUSINESS+SCIENCE+ART
THETRADEMARKERGROUP
TRADEMARKER
VOSIDÉESÀLAPORTÉEDUMONDE,DESAFFAIRESÀLAGRANDEURDELAPLANÈTE
YOURBUSINESSISTHEWORLDOFIDEAS;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOURIDEASTOTHEWORLD