Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

which the respective laws now grant or may hereafter grant to the citizens of that country. Consequently, they shall have the same protection as the latter and the same legal remedies against any infringements of their rights, provided they comply with the formalities and requirements imposed by the National laws of each State upon its own citizens. Any obligation of domicile or of establishment in the country where the protection is claimed shall not be imposed on the members of the Union.

ART. 10. All the contracting countries agree to assure to the members of the union an effective protection against unfair competition.

Article 6 of this agreement provides that trade-marks which are admitted to registry in the country of origin shall be admitted to registration and protected by all of the members of the Union unless (1) they infringe the rights of third parties in the country where protection is sought, (2) are not distinctive in the language or custom of the country where protection is sought, or (3) are contrary to morals or public order.

According to article 8 trade names are protected in all the countries of the union without the obligation of filing.

Article 9 provides that any product bearing illegally a trade-mark or trade name is prohibited from importation and shall be seized or otherwise disposed of by the country of importation.

Article 10 relating to false indications of origin is as follows:

ART. 10. The provisions of the preceding article shall be applicable to any product bearing falsely, as indication of place of production, the name of a definite locality, when this indication shall be joined to a fictitious or borrowed trade name with an intention to defraud.

As interested party is considered any producer, manufacturer, or merchant, engaged in the production, manufacture or commerce of such product, and established either in the locality falsely indicated as place of production or in the region where this locality is situated.

In the final protocol it was agreed that "the words 'propriété industrielle' (industrial property) should be taken in their broadest acceptation"; they extend to all production in the domain of agricultural industries (wines, grains, fruits, animals, etc.), and extractives (minerals, mineral water, etc.)."

At the Washington congress the Belgian delegate made the explicit reservation with regard to article 10bis that those countries which do not have a special law for the suppression of unfair competition shall not be obliged to enact any.

Great Britain desired that the Union should add the following clause to article 10bis:

The term "unfair competition" shall extend especially to the affixing to merchandise or products, conjointly or not with a trade-mark, of figures, words, or other indications calculated to make one believe or suppose that they come from a person other than he who has actually produced or sold them.

This amendment was not adopted, however, by the union on account of the objection of the Austrian delegate, whose instructions

did not allow the acceptance of any special agreement which would anticipate the legislation in course of enactment by his Government.1 Regarding the rights of foreigners, section 282 of the German unfair competition law of 1909 provides:

Whoever does not possess a principal place of business within the country has a claim to the protection of this law only in so far as in the State in which his principal place of business is found. German manufacturers enjoy a corresponding protection, according to an announcement contained in the Imperial Gazette.

However, this section no longer applies to the members of the Paris Union, since the adoption of article 10bis.

The German courts have repeatedly upheld article 10bis of the Paris Convention as amended at Brussels.

3

In the case of the Eagle Oil Co. of New York v. Vacuum Oil Co., the Imperial Court considered the question: Whether a stock company, which is located and has its main office in the United States, may invoke the protection of the German unfair competition law of May 27, 1896, even if it maintains no branch establishment in the German Empire. The court held as follows: According to article 10s of the Paris Convention, together with the Brussels amendment of December 14, 1900, all contracting parties enjoy the protection against unfair competition which exists in each of the individual States. As regards Germany it must be taken into account also that section 16 of the unfair competition law of 1896 (sec. 28 of the law of 1909), requiring a main establishment, was drafted mainly from the viewpoint of reciprocity, and that therefore its maintenance is irreconcilable with the purpose of article 10bis. Henceforth, a German whose main establishment is not located in the German Empire, but in one of the other States belonging to the Paris Union, may also invoke the protection of the unfair competition law in Germany, which he was unable to do before. The appellate court has rightfully held that, according to article 10's of the Paris Convention, the plaintiff, a stock company whose establishment is located in the United States of America, enjoys in Germany the protection of the unfair competition law, even if it has no branch establishment in the German Empire.

a case where a British concern brought suit against a German company for infringing upon the trade name "Liebig," to which the former claimed the exclusive right of use, the Imperial Court held that, since the British concern had been denied the exclusive use by the courts of its own country on the grounds that the name in dispute had become a matter of public ownership, no grounds for an action. existed in a German court.4

1 "Actes de la Conference réunie à Washington," Berne, 1911, p. 305.

2 Section 16 of the law of 1896.

3 Urt. v. 3. März 1905; Entsch. d. Reichsgerichts in Zivilsachen, 1905, Bd. 60, S. 217 fol.

4 Urt. v. 13. Nov. 1897; Entsch. d. Reichsgerichts in Civilsachen, Bd. 40, 1898, S. 61. See also ibid., Bd. 46, S. 125.

In the case of an Austrian merchant, whose place of business was located in Austria, and who brought suit against a German competitor for unfair acts of competition committed in Berlin, the Imperial Court decided that since Austria had become a member of the Paris Union the German unfair competition law of 1909, as well as the German Civil Code, were applicable to the case at issue, and that to Austrian citizens the same rights were accorded as to citizens of the German Empire.1

INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT FOR THE PREVENTION OF FALSE INDICATION OF ORIGIN ON GOODS.-On April 14, 1891, an international agreement for the prevention of false indications of origin on goods was entered into at Madrid and revised at Washington June 2, 1911, by the following countries: Brazil, Cuba, Spain, France, Great Britain, Portugal, Switzerland, and Tunis. This agreement contains the following provisions:

ART. 1. All goods bearing a false indication of origin in which one of the Contracting Countries, or a place situated therein, shall be directly or indirectly indicated as being the country or place of origin, shall be seized on importation into any of the said countries.

The seizure shall also take place either in the country where the false indication of origin has been applied, or in that into which the goods bearing the false indication may have been imported.

If the law of any country does not permit seizure on importation, such seizure shall be replaced by prohibition of importation.

If the law of any country does not permit seizure in the interior, such seizure shall be replaced by the remedies assured in such case to natives by the law of such country.

ART. 2. The seizure shall take place at the request either of the proper Government Department or of any competent authority, such, for example, as the Customs Administration or of an interested party, whether individual or society, in conformity with the domestic law of each country.

The authorities are not bound to effect the seizure of goods in transit.

ART. 3. The present stipulations are not intended to prevent the vendor from indicating his name or address upon goods coming from a country other than where the sale takes place; but in such case the address or the name must be accompanied by a clear indication in legible characters of the country or place of manufacture or production.

ART. 4. The Tribunals of each country will decide what appellations, on account of their generic character, do not fall within the provisions of the present Arrangement, regional appellations concerning the origin of products of the vine being, however, not comprised in the reserve specified by the present article.

INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT REGARDING THE REGISTRATION OF TRADEMARKS. An international agreement for the registration of trade

1 Reichsgericht, Urt. v. 16. Mai, 1911; Zeitschrift für Internat. Recht., Bd. 23, 1913. S. 350.

2 Papers and Correspondence relative to the Recent Conference at Washington for the revision of the International Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property and the Arrangement for the Prevention of False Indications of Origin on Goods, London, 1912, p. 114.

marks was established at Madrid, April 14, 1891.1 It was revised at Brussels December 14, 1900, and at Washington June 2, 1911.

The following countries are parties to this agreement: Austria, Hungary, Belgium, Brazil, Cuba, Spain, France, Italy, Mexico, Holland, Portugal, Switzerland, and Tunis. Articles 1 and 4 are of special interest.

ART. 1. The subjects or citizens of each of the contracting countries may secure protection for their trade-marks of industry or commerce, providing they have been admitted for registry in the country of origin, in all the other countries by registering said marks with the international bureau at Berne through the agency of the country of origin.

ART. 4. Upon the registration of the mark at the international bureau being made, the protection of the mark in each of the contracting countries will be the same as if said marks had been directly registered there.

*

ASSOCIATION FOR CREATING A WORLD TRADE-MARK.-On October 8, 1911, the Association for Creating a World Trade-Mark (Gesellschaft für Weltmarkenrecht) was organized at Berlin, with cooperating branches in 19 countries. The purpose of this association is to create a uniform trade-mark law which will be recognized and afford protection in all parts of the world.2

BERNE AGREEMENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF WORKS OF LITERATURE AND ART.-An international agreement for the protection of works of literature and art was established at Berne on September 9, 1886, and amended at Paris, May 4, 1896, and on November 13, 1908. The following countries were parties to this agreement: Belgium; Denmark, with its colonies; Germany; France, with its colonies; Great Britain, with its colonies and possessions; Italy; Japan; Liberia; Luxemburg; Monaco; Norway; Sweden; Switzerland; Spain, with its colonies; Tunis; and Portugal, with its colonies.

According to articles 1 and 2, the contracting countries constitute a league for protecting the copyright of works of literature, art, and science, including books, brochures, and other literary works, dramatic, musical, choreographic, and pantomime productions. To authors who are citizens of one of those countries such protection is guaranteed in all the other countries except the country of origin of the works, as the respective laws grant to domestic authors or shall grant in the future, as well as the rights especially stipulated in this agreement (art. 4). Protection is granted not only for nonpublished works, but also for works published for the first time in one of the countries belonging to the league.

MIDDLE-EUROPEAN ECONOMIC ASSOCIATION.-The Middle-European Economic Association, formed by the delegates from Germany, Austria, Hungary, and Belgium, at its seventh conference in Brussels,

1 Arrangement de Madrid pour l'enregistrement international des marques.

2 Markenschutz und Wettbewerb, Bd. XI., pp. 28, 129.

3 Katz; Textausgabe der gesamten deutschen Gesetzgebung und der internationalen und Sonderverträge des deutschen Reiches auf dem Gebiete des Patent, Muster und Zeichenwesens und des Urheberrechts. Berlin, 1912, S. 198.

April, 1912, and its eighth conference at Budapest January, 1914, discussed and formulated plans for simplifying and making more uniform the laws relating to unfair competition in the countries comprising this association. At the Budapest meeting it was recommended by several delegates that the Governments of the different States represented enact uniform legislation for the suppression of such unfair practices of competition, as false advertisements regarding quantity and quality, misappropriation and misuse of distinguishing marks for the purpose of enticing customers, disparaging competitors, betrayal or other violation of trust or spying out of business and trade secrets and fraudulent clearance sales.

In addition to this casuistic enumeration of certain practices of unfair competition, the adoption of a supplementary general clause was also recommended which would enable the courts to reach other practices of unfair competition that are grossly repugnant to good morals.2

SIXTH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATIONS.-At the Sixth International Congress of Chambers of Commerce and of Commercial and Industrial Associations at Paris, June, 1914, one of the leading subjects on the program was "The advisability of international action against unfair competition in the sense of the existing laws." Several special reports on this subject were embodied in the proceedings of the special committee on unfair competition.

The "Association des Anciens Élèves de l'École des Hautes Études Commerciales," in a special report submitted by it, proposed that the congress should inaugurate an international action for the suppression of unfair competition on the basis of the following program: 1. Legislation:

(a) The general adoption internationally of the French system of article 1382 of the Civil Code.

(b) Recognition of unfair competition in all countries as a penal offense, in order to permit the public ministry to initiate action.

2. Procedure:

Installation at Berne of a service for the suppression of unfair competition, whose duty it shall be (a) to furnish information to merchants regarding everything that relates to bringing suit in any tribunal of a country signatory to the conventions of Paris, Brussels, and Washington; (b) to notify the public ministry, that has jurisdiction, of cases of unfair competition.3

1 Verhandlungen der Mitteleuropäischen Wirtschafts-Konferenz in Brüssel, 1912, p. 289; Budapest, 1914, pp. 39, 301.

2 Pester Lloyd, Jan. 4, 1914.

3 Rapport présenté au nom de l'Association des Anciens Élèves de l'École des Hautes Études Commerciales, par M. Depuichault, Liége, 1914.

« ForrigeFortsett »