Taiwan: Proving secondary meaning with a survey

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Taiwan: Proving secondary meaning with a survey

According to Taiwan's trade mark examination practice, a three-dimensional mark in the form of a product packaging container is generally considered not inherently distinctive, and is registrable only upon proof of the secondary meaning acquired through long-term and extensive use. Without such evidence, the TIPO will refuse registration of the mark or require the applicant to disclaim the exclusive right to use the packaging container if there are distinctive word and/or device elements on the packaging container.

In practice, when examining evidence of use submitted for a three-dimensional mark, the TIPO takes the position that consumers will see the word and/or device elements on the packaging container, rather than the packaging container itself, as the identifier of the source of the product. Thus, even though the evidence submitted by the applicant could be voluminous, the TIPO may still deem such evidence not sufficient to prove the secondary meaning acquired by the three-dimensional mark.

The predecessor of EOS Products filed a trade mark application for a three-dimensional mark designated for use on cosmetics, lip balm, etc. The mark consists of the wording "eos" and a three-dimensional configuration of the packaging for the designated goods. The configuration is comprised of a spherical body with an indented portion on one side at the midpoint of the circumference. During prosecution, even though the applicant submitted evidence of use, the TIPO still rejected the application on the ground that the source identifier of the applicant's goods was the wording "eos" and the spherical packaging container was merely an ornamental design without having acquired secondary meaning.

After an unsuccessful appeal, EOS Products initiated administrative litigation before the IP Court. During litigation, in addition to the previously submitted evidence of use, EOS Products submitted reports on brand identity and brand awareness surveys launched in Taiwan. The surveys tested whether local consumers can recognise the spherical packaging, without the "eos" wording, as a source identifier of the relevant products, and the survey results showed that more than half of the interviewees recognised the spherical packaging as a source identifier.

The IP Court, holding that the survey reports were competent proof of acquired distinctiveness of the mark at issue, ruled in favor of EOS Products.

To increase the chances of getting a three-dimensional mark registered, the applicant may consider launching brand identify surveys in the local market in addition to gathering evidence of use.

hung.jpg

Julia YM Hung


Saint Island International Patent & Law Offices7th Floor, No. 248, Section 3Nanking East RoadTaipei 105-45, Taiwan, ROCTel: +886 2 2775 1823Fax: +886 2 2731 6377siiplo@mail.saint-island.com.twwww.saint-island.com.tw

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Leaders at the newly merged firm Jones Maxwell Smith & Davis reveal their plan to take on bigger firms while attracting more clients and talent
Charles Achkar, who will bring a team of two with him, said he was excited about joining ‘one of the few strong IP boutiques’
Andy Lee, head of IP at Brandsmiths and winner of the Soft IP Practitioner of the Year award, tells us why 2024 was a seminal year and why clients value brave advice
The deal to acquire MIP's parent company is expected to complete by the end of May 2025
Jinwon Chun discusses the need for vigilance, his love for iced coffee, and preparing for INTA
Karl Barnfather’s new patent practice will focus on protecting and enforcing tech innovations in the electronics, AI, and software industries
Partner Ranjini Acharya explains how her Federal Circuit debut resulted in her convincing the court to rule that machine learning technology was not patent-eligible
Paul Hastings and Smart & Biggar also won multiple awards, while Baker McKenzie picked up a significant prize
Burford Capital study finds that in-house lawyers have become more likely to monetise patents, but that their IP portfolios are still underutilised
Robert Reading and Faidon Zisis at Clarivate unpick some of the data surrounding music-related trademarks
Gift this article