CAnADA
LAnGUAGE tHAt MAKEs A PRoMIsE In A
sPECIfICAtIon nEEDs to BE CAREfULLY ConsIDERED
AnD UsED onLY If sUPPoRtED BY CoMPARAtIVE DAtA
Board applied the territoriality test. It found that the relevant musical fi les
trademarks
were created and stored on the master server in the US and that, without
In Parfums De Coeur v. Asta, the Federal Court was asked to follow the US
the stored copies, there was no reproduction of the works. Even though the
approach with respect to the concept of fraud on the trademark offi ce—that
instructions to copy came from Canada, the copies were made in the US.
any material misstatement in the processing of a registration renders the
Th e board rejected the “real and substantial connection” test and declined to
entire resulting registration void. It declined to do so. In this case, there was
impose a tariff for Canadian purposes.
a misstatement in the declaration of wares with the result that the applicant
However, a tariff was imposed on the “extended buff er” facility, which
obtained a registration broader in scope (in terms of the wares covered by
allows a subscriber to record, pause and replay content even though
the registration) than it was otherwise entitled to. Th e court declined to
those features are controlled by the user. Th e board found that the service
expunge the registration on the basis of the misstatement, noting instead that
providers controlled the programming and by decrypting the signal,
the voluntary amendment to the registration to delete the off ending wares
granted subscribers in Canada the right to use the additional copying
had resolved the situation. Th e court noted that the misstatement did not
services. Access to the copied content was controlled by the providers since
go to entitlement to registration but rather to the scope of the registration.
subscribers who stopped paying would no longer have access to the content
It went on to say:
stored in their receivers.
“Th e Applicant has advanced a policy basis for its claim for expungement
Th e board also considered the scope of the fair dealing exception following
– that there must be an incentive to tell the truth. Th e Applicant relies
the Supreme Court’s decision in CCH Canadian v. Law Society of Upper
on the U.S. model of draconian results for even an innocent mistake.
Canada. Satellite receivers containing prerecorded samples of musical
Canadian law is more nuanced and balanced.”
channels, which were used in stores to incite buyers to purchase the receivers,
Under the Trade-marks Act, a registration for a trademark may be expunged
did not constitute fair dealing. Th e consumers had not requested a sample of
where the trademark has not been used in Canada for a period of three years
the works, and the copies were initiated and made by the service providers.
and there are no special circumstances justifying non-use.
Th e board found that this could not be considered “facilitating research”
for the purposes of deciding whether to purchase a receiver. Th is fi nding Th e Federal Court recently had the opportunity to consider whether a
contrasts with the board’s earlier decision that off ering music previews voluntary decision not to use could constitute special circumstances (i.e.
to allow customers to decide whether to purchase and download musical circumstances not found in most cases of absence of use of the mark) in Jose
works constituted private research and was therefore fair dealing. Cuervo S.A. de C.V. v. Bacardi & Company Limited.
www.worldipreview.com World Intellectual Property Review Digest 2009 47
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173