Introduction
The recent decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks (the “Registrar”) in Xiaomi Inc v MiChat Pte Ltd [2021] SGIPOS 2 (“Xiaomi v MiChat”) saw the battle between the mark “
” against “
” wherein the Registrar decided that the latter was more similar than dissimilar to the earlier mark, hence the latter mark should not be allowed registration.
Key Takeaways
We summarise the key takeaways from Xiaomi v MiChat as follows:
- Highly stylistic marks that may not be perceived by word(s) may be rendered more dissimilar than similar when compared to legible word marks;
- Some differences between trademarks that possess a moderate (i.e. “not high”) level of technical distinctiveness may be sufficient to render them more dissimilar than similar; and
- Since the relevant consumers would not pay much attention when downloading or purchasing mobile applications, they are likely to perceive mobile applications bearing similar trademarks as emanating from the same source or from sources that are economically linked.
Full article can be found here.
For further information, please contact:
Esther Wee
Head of IP
Harry Elias Partnership LLP
+65 6361 9350
Tan Weiyi
Partner
Harry Elias Partnership LLP
+65 6361 9376
Supporting Team Member
Daniel Yap
Trainee
Harry Elias Partnership LLP