Intel Corporation v Third Party Platform Pty Ltd

Case

[2012] ATMO 57

20 June 2012


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Intel Corporation v Third Party Platform Pty Ltd [2012] ATMO 57 [2012] ATMO 57 20 June 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an opposition by Intel Corporation to the registration of trade mark application number 1315445 by Third Party Platform Pty Ltd. The opposition was based on grounds including section 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth), which relates to the registration of trade marks that are identical or deceptively similar to a well-known trade mark. The hearing officer was required to determine whether the opponent had established any grounds for opposition on the balance of probabilities, with the relevant date for such establishment being the filing date of the application, 17 August 2009.

The evidence presented by Intel Corporation demonstrated that it is the owner of numerous Australian trade mark registrations for the word INTEL, including in class 36. The evidence established that the INTEL name and trade marks are exceptionally well known globally and in Australia, particularly in relation to information technology and computer microprocessors, with Intel being the world's largest semiconductor manufacturer. The hearing officer considered evidence of Intel's history, its global revenue and advertising expenditure, the development and success of its "INTEL INSIDE" licensing program, its diversification into financial services and e-commerce solutions, and extensive third-party recognition of the INTEL brand through various publications and surveys. Furthermore, decisions in other jurisdictions recognising the INTEL trade mark as well-known or famous were also taken into account.

Applying the principles established in cases such as *Pfizer Products Inc v Karam* and *Chocolaterie Guylian N.V. v Registrar of Trade Marks*, the hearing officer found that Intel Corporation had discharged the onus of proving that its INTEL trade mark was well known in Australia as at the filing date of the application. Consequently, the hearing officer determined that the ground of opposition under section 60 of the Act had been established. The hearing officer refused to register trade mark application 1315445 and awarded costs to the Opponent.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Intellectual Property

Legal Concepts

  • Costs

  • Standing

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

9

Statutory Material Cited

0

Pfizer Products Inc v Karam [2006] FCA 1663