Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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

Vietnam: The registrability of media-hype and sensational marks

Sponsored by

tillekegibbins.png
sigmund-dbu3wq2o5sm-unsplash.jpg

Linh Thi Mai Nguyen and Chi Lan Dang of Tilleke & Gibbins discuss the growth and challenges of media-hype trademarks in Vietnam

Given the highly polarised state of US politics, one may find it difficult to imagine a scenario where Donald Trump and Joe Biden appear together outside of a debate stage. Surprisingly, these names were united on a Vietnamese trademark application filed during the heat of the US presidential election in 2020.

91a2779883f5441e8413953bf31d49da
Logo for 'Trump-Biden'

This ‘Trump-Biden’ mark was filed for food, beverages, and restaurants in Classes 29, 30 and 43 — items with no link to the two presidents. The only reason for such filing, obviously, was to gain consumers’ attention and to ride a wave of popularity, although in a rather unusual way.

Attention-seeking entrepreneurs are often inspired by celebrities and recent events when seeking new brand names and slogans. They may attempt to register their ideas as trademarks while the influence of the person or event is still strong. Others take a different but similarly sensational approach, crafting marks loaded with double entendre with the hope of sneaking past the gatekeepers.

While the idea of registering celebrity-driven or sensational marks may be beneficial for business, is it possible under Vietnam’s IP laws?

Famous people’s names

In addition to the ‘Trump-Biden’ mark mentioned above, a quick search on the public database of the IP Office of Vietnam reveals several dozen ‘Trump’-related marks, with most of them filed after Donald Trump’s inauguration in 2017. The IP Office’s decisions have shown that marks explicitly referring to the former president (such as the full-name trademark ‘Donald Trump’) will be refused protection, but more subtle indicators can survive to registration, such as ‘Dontrump’ (Reg. No. 327991), ‘Betatrump’ (Reg. No. 329952), ‘Trump Gold’ (Reg. No. 313441), ‘Trump Water’ (Reg. No. 355166), and even ‘Trump’ by itself (Reg. No. 342771).

df1d5c97fa044d1cae9df653656ff27a
The mark for 'Trump Water'

Under Article 73.3 of the IP Law, “signs identical or confusingly similar to real names, aliases, pseudonyms or images of leaders, national heroes or famous personalities of Vietnam or foreign countries” are ineligible for protection as marks, regardless of the goods/services applied for. This is why the ‘Donald Trump’ mark was refused, but it seems to apply only to obvious cases, such as where the full name of the famous person is exploited. If only a part of the name is used, it could still be accepted. From that view, it is likely that the ‘Trump-Biden’ mark could be considered inherently distinctive, as it includes neither the full names nor the images of the presidents.

Another interesting ‘Trump’-derived mark is found in a pending application for ‘Trumpkids Kindergarten’.

9a9a9d109ae8476ba08dbb334ef3494d
Logo for 'Trumpkids Kindergarten'

While the Trump inspiration in the faceless image is undeniable, could this mark still be considered registrable? It consists of the name and image of a famous person, but both are stylised and combined with other elements. In our opinion, the mark is likely to get through. If so, this is an example of a clever way to utilise the fame of a person, while skirting the prohibitions of Article 73.3.

On the other hand, names or signs similar to those of well-known people with decidedly negative reputations – war criminals or terrorists, for example – may be refused for being contrary to social ethics and public order as stipulated in Article 8.1 of the IP Law, regardless of how ‘creative’ the marks are. The mark ‘Billaden’ for pesticides in Class 05 was refused for being confusingly similar to the name of Osama Bin Laden. Although the applicant argued that ‘Billaden’ was fanciful and in no way related to the infamous terrorist, the IP Office held that the registration of the mark was against morality and public policy, and maintained its refusal.

Vulgar or sensational slogans

Some companies, especially in youth-oriented sectors like video games or beverages, adopt ridiculous, ear/eye-catching marks in the hope of gaining more attention for their products or services. One of Vietnam’s most popular craft breweries has applied for a series of winkingly raunchy bilingual marks for beer in Class 32, including ‘Bom Vu Du Xai’ (roughly ‘breast augmentation big enough to use’) ‘Fifty-two Triple Z’; ‘Coi Do Ra’ (‘take off your clothes’) ‘Let’s Get Naked’; and ‘An Banh Tra Tien’ (slang for ‘buy/use prostitute’) ‘No Cookie No Nookie’. While such names are commonplace in the freewheeling craft beer industry, it remains to be seen if they are registrable in Vietnam.

Although the marks are pending without any issued opinion from the IP Office, a similar case was refused for protection. The stylised mark ‘Nude’ for trading services of food, clothing, household appliances, etc., in Class 35 was refused for again being contrary to social ethics and public order.

The standards for judging this are quite subjective and dependent on the particular examiner’s viewpoint. For example, we found the mark ‘Fascist’ was successfully registered for insecticides in Class 05, while ‘Dap Da’ (literally ‘beat the rock’ but slang for ‘use drugs’) was registered for restaurant services in Class 43. Based on this precedent, it is highly likely that the pending ‘Let’s Get Naked’ mark will be refused but the others will survive to registration, due to their indirect wording.

Our perspective

We respect our clients’ choices, but we maintain certain standards. While some phrases, symbols, and other sensitive components may evoke powerful emotions that increase sales of the goods they designate, limits must also be set. Bearing in mind that Vietnam is an Asian country with high standards regarding social ethics, foreign companies should be mindful in choosing trademarks to be used in the country. The purpose is not only to have their marks registered, but also to have them accepted by mass Vietnamese consumers.

In addition, media-hype trademarks often have short shelf-lives, while the registration procedure in Vietnam is lengthy, normally 20-24 months. If and when the trademark registrations are granted, it may already be too late to draw the public’s attention. In the end, investing in thoughtful, sustainable trademarks will always be the right choice.

 

Linh Thi Mai Nguyen

Partner, Tilleke & Gibbins

E: mailinh.n@tilleke.com

 

Chi Lan Dang

Associate, Tilleke & Gibbins

E: chi.d@tilleke.com



more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Civil society and industry representatives met in Geneva on Thursday, September 28 to discuss a potential expansion of the TRIPS waiver
Sources say the beta version of the USPTO’s new trademark search tool is a big improvement over the current system but that it isn’t perfect
Canadian counsel weigh in on the IP office’s decision to raise trademark filing fees in 2024 and how they’re preparing clients
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Shira Perlmutter, US Register of Copyrights, discussed the Copyright Office's role in forming generative AI policy during a House of Representatives hearing
The award marks one of the highest-ever damages received by a foreign company in a trademark infringement suit in China
Two orders denying public access to documents have reignited a debate over a lack of transparency at the new court
Rouse’s new chief of operations and the firm’s CEO tell Managing IP why they think private equity backing will help it conquer Europe
Brian Landry, partner at Saul Ewing, reveals how applicants can prosecute patent applications in the wake of the Federal Circuit's In re Cellect ruling
Ronelle Geldenhuys of Australia’s Foundry IP considers the implications complex computer technologies such as AI have on decision-making