Trade-Mark registration “curbed” throught cancellation proceedings

T
RADE-MARKREGISTRATION“CURBED”THROUGHCANCELLATION
PROCEEDINGS

A
LEXANDRASTEELE*
LEGERROBICRICHARD,
LLP
L
AWYERS,PATENT&TRADEMARKAGENTS
TheRegistrarofTrade-Markshavingdeterminedthatwasinsufficientevidenceofuseof
atrade-markinassociationwithcertainwaresandserviceslistedintheregistration,she
orderedthatthetrade-markregistrationbeamended.Onappeal,theFederalCourtof
CanadapartiallyreversedthedecisionoftheRegistraras,onthebasisofadditional
evidence,theCourtfoundthat,atleastforcertainwaresandservices,therewas
sufficientevidenceofuseofthetrade-mark.[MichaelCurbv.Smart&Biggar,2009FC
47,HarringtonJ,January20,2009].
TheFacts
TheFederalCourtofCanadawasseizedofanappealofadecisionoftheRegistrarof
trade-marksexpungingcertainwaresfromregistrationTMA521,953forthetrade-mark
CURBRECORDS.TheApplicant,Mr.MichaelCurb,awell-knownrecordproducerand
headofthecompanyCurbRecords,istheownerofthetrade-markCURBRECORDS.
Theregistrationoriginallycoveredavarietyofwaresandservicesrelatingthe
entertainmentfield.TheRespondenttrade-markandpatentagencyfirmofSmart&
BiggaraskedtheRegistrartoissueanoticeunderSection45oftheTrade-MarksAct:
suchnoticerequiredMr.CurbtoproveuseinCanadaofhistrade-markCURB
RECORDSinassociationwitheachandeveryproductandservicelistedinthe
registrationatanytimeduringthepreviousthreeyearsprecedingthedateofthenotice.
AfterconsideringtheevidencesubmittedinreplytotheSection45notice,theRegistrar
foundthatthetherewasinsufficientevidenceofuseofthetrade-markCURB
RECORDSinassociationwithcertainwaresandservices:consequently,theRegistrar
orderedthosewaresandservicesexpungedfromtheregistration.
Mr.CurbappealedthisdecisionoftheRegistrartotheFederalCourt.

©CIPS,2009.*Lawyer,AlexandraSteeleisamemberofLEGERROBICRICHARD,L.L.P.,amultidisciplinaryfirmof
lawyers,andpatentandtrademarkagents.PublishedintheAprilissueoftheWorldIntellectualProperty
Report.Publication64.222.

2
TheFederalCourtJudgement
Pursuanttosection56oftheTrade-MarksAct,onappealtotheFederalCourtofa
decisionoftheRegistraroftrade-marks,theapplicantisentitledtofilenewevidence,
whichMr.Curbdid.Forthisnewevidencetobeconsideredonappeal,itmustbefound
thatitwouldhavemateriallyaffectedtheRegistrar’sfindingsifithadoriginallybeen
presentedtoherinthefirstplace.Inthiscase,theCourtruledthattheadditional
evidencewouldhaveinfluencedtheRegistrar’sdecisionandonthisbasis,theCourt
waspreparedtoconsiderthecasedenovo,withoutanydeferencetotheRegistrar’s
findingsorwithouthavingtoidentifyanerrorcommittedbyherinordertoallowthe
appeal.
JusticeHarringtonthenwentontoreiteratethat,pursuanttoSection45oftheTrade-
MarksAct,theregisteredownerofatrade-markmust“show”use,notmerelyassertit.
Afterconsideringthewaresandservicesthathadbeenstruckfromtheregistrationby
theRegistrar,andinlightofthenewevidencebeforetheCourt,JusticeHarrington
foundthatexceptfortwoparticularproducts,thenewevidencewassufficientto
overturntheRegistrar’sdecision.
Inparticular,theCourtfoundthataccesstoawebsiteinordertolistentopre-recorded
musicandtoviewvideosthroughaservicelistenedtoinCanada,fromacomputer
situatedinCanada,wassufficientevidenceofuseofthetrade-markCURBRECORDS
inassociationwith“entertainmentservicesbypre-recordedmusic”.Also,thenew
evidencehadrevealedthatMr.Curb’scompany,CurbRecords,hadproducedamusic
videoforoneofthesongsfromaCDreleasedinCanada.SinceCurbRecordshad
hiredthecompanywhichfilmedthevideo,andsinceithadultimatecontroloverthe
musicvideothatwasproduced,thisnewevidencewassufficienttoenabletheCourtto
finduseofthetrade-markCURBRECORDSinassociationwithservicesof“production,
publishinganddistributionofaudioandaudio-visualrecordings”inCanada.
Finally,theevidenceadducedbyMr.Curbwasdeemedambiguousinrespectof“t-
shirtsandcaps”asitfailedtodemonstratethattheseproductshadbeensoldor
distributedinCanadainassociationCURBRECORDS.Theaffidavitevidencesubmitted
onappealindicatedthat“t-shirtsandcaps”hadbeen“soldand/ordistributedinCanada
and/ortheUnitedStates”.TheCourtstatedthatsuchambiguityastowhetherornot
salesanddistributionshadactuallytakenplaceinCanadashouldbeconstruedagainst
theaffiantandtherefore,theRegistrar’sdecisiontostriketheseproductsfromthe
registrationwasreasonable.Onthebasisoftheevidencetakenasawhole,theCourt
couldnotinferthat“t-shirtsandcaps”wouldhavebeencommerciallyavailablefor
distributionbysaleorotherwiseinCanada.JusticeHarringtonstatedthatneitherthe
RegistrarnortheCourtwouldundertakeanexerciseofspeculation,butratherthatthey
neededtodrawproperinferencefromproventhefacts.Itwouldhadbeenrelatively
easyforMr.Curbtoprovesuchsalesand/ordistributioninCanadabyshowing,for
example,customsbrokerrecordstoshowthattheitemswasimportedtoCanadaand

3
thenre-exported,oriftheproductshadbeensoldinCanada,thereshouldbe
accountingrecords,namelyservicestaxesrecordsthatcouldhavebeenputforward.
Absentthistypeofevidence,theCourtcouldnotconcludethatthetrade-markCURB
RECORDShadbeenusedinassociationwith“t-shirtsandcaps”.
Forthesereasons,theCourtgrantedtheappealinpartandorderedthat“clothing,
namelyt-shirtsandcaps”bedeletedfromthewaresspecificationforthetrade-mark
registrationforCURBRECORDS.
Conclusion
ThiscaseservesasareminderthatSection45proceedingsandthequalityofthe
evidenceputforwardbyatrade-markownershouldnotbetrivialised,astheRegistrar
andtheCourtswillnothesitatetodeletewaresandservicesbasedonthelackof
evidenceofuseofthetrade-markinassociationwithsuchwaresandservices.
Ambiguousevidencewillalsobeinterpretedagainstthetrade-markowner.Trade-mark
ownersshouldthereforeexercisegreatcareanddiligencewhenputtingtogetherthe
evidenceinsupportofmaintainingallorpartofatrade-markregistrationtoavoidany
smallorextensivelossoftrade-markrights.

ROBIC,ungroupedavocatsetdagentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommerce
vouédepuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelledans
touslesdomaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielsetmodèlesutilitaires;marquesde
commerce,marquesdecertificationetappellationsdorigine;droitsdauteur,
propriétélittéraireetartistique,droitsvoisinsetdelartisteinterprète;informatique,
logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;biotechnologies,pharmaceutiquesetobtentions
végétales;secretsdecommerce,know-howetconcurrence;licences,franchiseset
transfertsdetechnologies;commerceélectronique,distributionetdroitdesaffaires;
marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;poursuite,litigeetarbitrage;vérificationdiligente
etaudit.ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademarkagentsdedicated
since1892totheprotectionandthevalorizationofallfieldsofintellectualproperty:
patents,industrialdesignsandutilitypatents;trademarks,certificationmarksand
indicationsoforigin;copyrightandentertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,
neighbouringrights;computer,softwareandintegratedcircuits;biotechnologies,
pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;tradesecrets,know-how,competitionandanti-
trust;licensing,franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-commerce,distributionand

4
businesslaw;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecutionlitigationandarbitration;
duediligence.
COPYRIGHTER
IDEASLIVEHERE
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLULINVENTER!
LAMAÎTRISEDESINTANGIBLES
LEGERROBICRICHARD
NOSFENÊTRESGRANDESOUVERTESSURLEMONDEDESAFFAIRES
PATENTER
R
ROBIC
ROBIC+DROIT+AFFAIRES+SCIENCES+ARTS
ROBIC++++
ROBIC+LAW+BUSINESS+SCIENCE+ART
THETRADEMARKERGROUP
TRADEMARKER
VOSIDÉESÀLAPORTÉEDUMONDE,DESAFFAIRESÀLAGRANDEURDELA
PLANÈTE
YOURBUSINESSISTHEWORLDOFIDEAS;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOUR
IDEASTOTHEWORLD
Trade-marksofLEGERROBICRICHARD,
LLP(“ROBIC”)