www.asiaiplaw.com Open in urlscan Pro
172.104.63.121  Public Scan

Form analysis
2 forms found in the DOM

GET https://www.asiaiplaw.com/search

<form method="get" action="https://www.asiaiplaw.com/search" class="form-inline">
  <div class="form-group"><label for="search-keyword" class="sr-only">Search</label>
    <div class="input-group">
      <div class="input-group-addon pr0"><i class="fa fa-search"></i></div> <input type="text" id="search-keyword" placeholder="Enter Keyword" name="keyword" value="" class="form-control">
      <div class="input-group-addon pl0 clear-input"><i class="fa fa-times"></i></div>
    </div>
  </div>
</form>

GET https://www.asiaiplaw.com/search

<form method="get" action="https://www.asiaiplaw.com/search" class="form-inline">
  <div class="form-group mb0">
    <div class="input-group">
      <div class="input-group-addon"><i class="fa fa-search"></i></div> <label for="search-keyword-mobile" class="hidden">Search</label> <input type="text" id="search-keyword-mobile" placeholder="Enter Keyword" name="keyword" class="form-control">
    </div>
  </div>
</form>

Text Content

 * Login
 * Register
 * Subscribe

 * Language (EN)
   * Chinese Simplified
   * Chinese Traditional


 * Sections
   * Cover Story
   * In Depth
   * News Analysis
   * The Verdict
   * People & Places
   * IP Analysts
   * Strategy Guides
   * IP Experts
 * Sectors
   * Trademarks
   * Prosecution
   * Pharma & Biotech
   * Patents
   * Media
   * Litigation
   * Licensing & Franchising
   * IT & Telecoms
   * IP Management
   * Industrial Designs
   * Enforcement
   * Dispute Resolution
   * Copyright
 * Jurisdictions
 * IP Awards
 * Events
 * IP Experts
 * Law Firms

Search


Search
 * Login
 * Register
 * Subscribe

 * Language (EN)
   * Chinese Simplified
   * Chinese Traditional

 * Sections
   * Cover Story
   * In Depth
   * News Analysis
   * The Verdict
   * People & Places
   * IP Analysts
   * Strategy Guides
   * IP Experts
 * Sectors
   * Trademarks
   * Prosecution
   * Pharma & Biotech
   * Patents
   * Media
   * Litigation
   * Licensing & Franchising
   * IT & Telecoms
   * IP Management
   * Industrial Designs
   * Enforcement
   * Dispute Resolution
   * Copyright
 * Jurisdictions
 * IP Awards
 * Events
 * IP Experts
 * Law Firms


 1. Asia IP
 2. Section
 3. IP Analysts


AN AMAZON DISCOVERY

24 October 2024





This recent Intellectual Property Office of Singapore decision delved into the
registrability of an AMAZON-formative mark sought to be registered by a
Singapore-incorporated company. 

Background 

Survivalverse Pte Ltd (the applicant) is a Singapore-incorporated company that
principally develops videogames and software, which applied to register the mark
(the application mark) in Classes 9 and 41, to be used for software and
provision of computer games. 

Amazon Technologies Inc (the opponent) is widely known as one of the world’s
largest companies operating an ecommerce website (www.amazon.com), accessible to
consumers worldwide and in Singapore. As part of their offerings, the opponent
founded Amazon Game Studios to develop and publish video games. These video
games are available on major gaming platforms, the Amazon app store, and both
the Apple App Store and Google Play Store, under the “Amazon Games” mark and
brand.  

The opponent, having owned numerous earlier trademark registrations comprising
or containing the word “Amazon”, opposed the application mark on the grounds a)
that the marks were confusingly similar; b) that use of the application mark
would damage the interests of the opponent; c) that the application mark was
similar to its well-known marks thereby causing a dilution; and d) of passing
off. 

Confusing similarity of the marks 

The Registrar held the following: 

Visual similarity  

The significant size difference of

 

meant that this would visually stand out in the application mark. The Registrar
held that given imperfect recollection, consumers would recall “AMAZON” as the
distinctive and dominant element, which is highly similar to the opponent’s
“AMAZON” marks. 

Aural similarity  

In applying the dominant component approach – whereby the dominant and
distinctive component of the marks are considered, the size differential of the
application mark

meant that the average consumer would likely place verbal emphasis on



as the aurally distinctive and dominant component. As the opponent’s plain font
“AMAZON” mark is also “AMAZON”, it was concluded that the marks are aurally
similar.  

Conceptual similarity 

The Registrar held the view that “AMAZON” is likely to be understood by the
public as a reference to a known geographical location and the addition of
“SURVIVAL” and other elements such as the pawprint and the colour green in the
application mark would only reinforce this geographical location in the minds of
the public. 

Based on the above, the Registrar concluded that application mark bears strong
levels of similarity with the opponent’s “AMAZON” marks. 

Identical goods and services 

In examination of the similarity of goods and services, it is acknowledged by
the applicant and concurred by the Registrar that the goods and services sought
in Class 9 and 41 of the application mark, is identical to those covered under
the opponent’s registered mark no. T1416619I “AMAZON”. 

Likelihood of confusion 

In assessing whether there is a likelihood of confusion, the Registrar held that
there are at least two aspects to be considered, the first being the mistaking
of one mark for another, and the second being where the relevant segment of the
public may well perceive that the conflicting marks are different but yet remain
confused as to the origin, they may mistakenly believe that the goods and
services bearing the two marks to come from the same source and have some
links.  

As the application mark and the opponent’s “AMAZON” mark are significantly
similar with identical goods and services, the Registrar held the view that
consumers are likely to be confused into thinking that the goods and services
under the application mark belong to that of the opponent or has links to the
opponent and hence, a likelihood of confusion. 

Conclusion 

Accordingly, the Registrar allowed the opposition on the grounds of the
application mark being confusingly similar and the application mark was
consequently refused registration. 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


ABOUT THE AUTHOR


DENISE MIRANDAH



As a Director, Denise Mirandah has played a major role in the international
promotion of the company, helping to share the family values of Mirandah
Asia and its successful one-stop shop approach to IP with clients all over the
world.

Denise has had a passion for IP from an early age and, as the daughter of
Patrick and Gladys Mirandah, grew up in a household where IP was discussed
regularly. She studied her Bachelor of Laws at the prestigious Cambridge
University in the UK. There, she underwent rigorous academic training with the
world’s most eminent legal minds, including Professor Bill Cornish, a renowned
authority on IP law.

During her summer holidays, she attended Harvard University in the US to hone
her drafting skills and familiarise herself with the American legal system,
voluntarily working as part of Harvard’s pro bono programme in Boston.

Denise has been admitted to the Bar in Singapore since 2009, and in Brunei as of
2017.




KEVIN CHUA



Kevin Chua is a trademark executive at mirandah asia. In his role at the firm,
he primarily manages clients’ trademark portfolios across the ASEAN countries,
develops strategies and assists them in overcoming obstacles in their trademark
registrations. He graduated with a Diploma in Law & Management from Temasek
Polytechnic before moving to the United Kingdom for a few years to obtain his
Bachelor of Laws Degree from the University of Birmingham. 




LAW FIRMS



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0 Shares Share Tweet LinkedIn Email
Tags: Singapore Amazon Intellectual Property


LAW FIRMS


SINGAPORE

 * Allen & Gledhill
 * Dentons Rodyk
 * Drew & Napier
 * Kelvin Chia Partnership
 * Mirandah Asia


RELATED ARTICLES


CHINA’S IP EXPERTS 2024

30 October 2024


MYANMAR ISSUES FIRST TRADEMARK REGISTRATION CERTIFICATES UNDER NEW TRADEMARK LAW

10 December 2024


AI REVOLUTIONIZES AGRICULTURE: HOW AI FARM TECH IS SHAPING THE FUTURE OF
SUSTAINABLE FARMING

06 December 2024


COPYRIGHT EXCEPTION RULES IN SINGAPORE NEED TO BE CLARIFIED – U.S. MOTION
PICTURE ASSOCIATION

10 December 2024


 * 
 * 


ABOUT US

Business Intelligence from the Top

Asia IP is the region’s leading source for analysis of the IP issues facing
companies in Asia; a vital source of intelligence for IP-owning companies, and
law firms that want to keep ahead of the key issues. Focusing on the issues
behind the headlines, it provides unparalleled access to the challenges and
solutions companies face when trying to protect their intellectual assets.

Asia IP is published by the Apex Asia Media Group, a leading independent
publisher based in Hong Kong.

 * Home
 * Jurisdictions
 * IP Experts
 * Law Firms
 * Events
 * Media Information
 * Terms and Condition
 * Privacy Policy
 * Contact Us


SECTORS

Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Copyright Licensing & Franchising Media
Enforcement
Dispute Resolution IP Management Pharma & Biotech Litigation Prosecution IT &
Telecoms

Copyright © 2024 Asia IP. All rights reserved.
Halcyon Web Design

We recommend to enable your javascript upon using this website to see full
functionality.
Please click the link on how to enable it: https://www.enable-javascript.com/

Please wait while the page is loading...