Several conventions state that “Members may require, as a
condition of registration, that signs be visually perceptible”. In other
words, it does not contain a mandatory requirement for Members to
register and protect trademarks consisting of non-visible signs. In some
jurisdictions, the issue of graphical representation is dealt with
separately, particularly in countries where a condition for registration is
that a sign be “represented graphically”. The requirement of graphic
representation of trademarks has given rise to questions of interpretation
in jurisdictions that apply this requirement, in particular with respect to
certain non-visible marks, such as sound marks not consisting of
musical sounds, or smell marks. In accordance with the jurisprudence of
some countries, for example, a graphical representation of a trademark
in order to be acceptable must be clear, precise, and complete by itself,
easily accessible, understandable, durable and objective.
In Japan Patent Office, several subjects on the new types of
non-traditional marks are being studied. Korean Intellectual Property
Office has already accepted motion marks, hologram marks and color
marks in 2007 but has not yet accepted smell marks and sound marks.
And Japan Patent Office has not yet accepted the new types of
non-traditional marks.
On the other hand, we can find out several points overlooked
about modifying Trademark Act when analyzing the report of Japan
Patent Office. Therefore, we need to review non-traditional marks’
systems already accepted by Korean Intellectual Property Office as well
as smell marks and sound marks through reference to Japan Patent
Office’s report.
In Conclusion, Korean Intellectual Property Office should consider
all contents on the report of Japan Patent Office, in order to minimize
several legal problems about the new types of non-traditional marks.