Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to www.scribd.com

Scribd
Upload
391 views1 page

992 Asia Pacific Resources Vs PaperOne

Asia Pacific Resources International Holdings (APRIH) owns the trademark "PAPER ONE" and alleges that Paperone Inc.'s use of "PAPERONE" in its corporate name without consent infringes on APRIH's trademark rights. Paperone Inc. claims it received approval from the DTI and SEC to use the name. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of APRIH, finding that it had established prior use and ownership of the "Paper One" trademark, and that Paperone Inc. was aware of APRIH's prior rights before adopting the similar name.

Uploaded by

erica peji
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
391 views1 page

992 Asia Pacific Resources Vs PaperOne

Asia Pacific Resources International Holdings (APRIH) owns the trademark "PAPER ONE" and alleges that Paperone Inc.'s use of "PAPERONE" in its corporate name without consent infringes on APRIH's trademark rights. Paperone Inc. claims it received approval from the DTI and SEC to use the name. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of APRIH, finding that it had established prior use and ownership of the "Paper One" trademark, and that Paperone Inc. was aware of APRIH's prior rights before adopting the similar name.

Uploaded by

erica peji
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

COMMERCIAL LAW; PRIORITY RIGHT TO USE

Question: Asia Pacific Resources International Holdings, Ltd. is engaged in the


production, marketing, and sale of pulp and premium wood free paper. It alleged that it
is the owner of a well-known trademark, PAPER ONE. It claimed that the use of
PAPERONE in respondent's corporate name without its prior consent and authority was
done in bad faith and designed to unfairly ride on its good name and to take advantage
of its goodwill. It was also alleged that respondent had presumptive, if not actual
knowledge, of petitioner's rights to the trademark PAPER ONE, even prior to
respondent's application for registration of its corporate name before the Securities and
Exchange Commission. Respondent, on its part, averred that it had no obligation to
secure prior consent or authority from petitioner to adopt and use its corporate name.
The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the SEC had allowed it to use
Paperone, Inc., thereby negating any violation on petitioner's alleged prior rights. Who
has priority right to use PAPERONE?
Answer: In Converse Rubber Corporation vs. Universal Rubber Products, Inc. and
Evalle, the court said: Knowing therefore that the word "CONVERSE" belongs to and is
being used by petitioner, and is in fact the dominant word in petitioner's corporate name,
respondent has no right to appropriate the same for use on its products which are
similar to those being produced by petitioner.
Records will show that there was prior use and adoption by Complainant of the word
"PaperOne." The fact of earlier use was not disputed by the Respondent. In point of
fact, Respondent already knew of Complainant's APRIL existence prior to Respondent's
incorporation as Paper One, Inc. in 2001. (Asia Pacific Resources International
Holdings, Ltd. vs Paperone, Inc., G. R. No. 213365-66, December 10, 2018,
Gesmundo, J. )

You might also like