--- title: "Zambia: Honest Concurrent Use or Special Circumstances" description: "A recent Zambian Court of Appeal (CA) trade mark judgment, United States Polo Association v LA Group Limited (7 December 2018)" image: https://spoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Zambia.jpeg canonical: https://spoor.com/zh/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/ url: https://spoor.getmd.ai/zh/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/.md last_converted: 2026-09-22T08:12:27.211Z --- ```json { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@graph": [ { "@type": "Article", "@id": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/#article", "isPartOf": { "@id": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/" }, "author": { "name": "Spoor & Fisher", "@id": "https://spoor.com/#/schema/person/7dad7b9bcdd00617832fbe66d90d9c29" }, "headline": "Zambia: Honest Concurrent Use or Special Circumstances", "datePublished": "2019-02-21T12:34:55+00:00", "dateModified": "2025-01-14T07:10:34+00:00", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@id": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/" }, "wordCount": 725, "commentCount": 0, "publisher": { "@id": "https://spoor.com/#organization" }, "image": { "@id": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/#primaryimage" }, "thumbnailUrl": "https://spoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Zambia.jpeg", "articleSection": [ "News Article" ], "inLanguage": "zh-Hans", "potentialAction": [ { "@type": "CommentAction", "name": "Comment", "target": [ "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/#respond" ] } ] }, { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/", "url": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/", "name": "Zambia: Honest Concurrent Use or Special Circumstances", "isPartOf": { "@id": "https://spoor.com/#website" }, "primaryImageOfPage": { "@id": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/#primaryimage" }, "image": { "@id": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/#primaryimage" }, "thumbnailUrl": "https://spoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Zambia.jpeg", "datePublished": "2019-02-21T12:34:55+00:00", "dateModified": "2025-01-14T07:10:34+00:00", "description": "A recent Zambian Court of Appeal (CA) trade mark judgment, United States Polo Association v LA Group Limited (7 December 2018)", "breadcrumb": { "@id": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/#breadcrumb" }, "inLanguage": "zh-Hans", "potentialAction": [ { "@type": "ReadAction", "target": [ "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/" ] } ] }, { "@type": "ImageObject", "inLanguage": "zh-Hans", "@id": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/#primaryimage", "url": "https://spoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Zambia.jpeg", "contentUrl": "https://spoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Zambia.jpeg", "width": 1400, "height": 250, "caption": "Victoria Falls from the air in the afternoon" }, { "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "@id": "https://spoor.com/zambia-honest-concurrent-use-or-special-circumstances/#breadcrumb", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "name": "Home", "item": "https://spoor.com/" }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": 2, "name": "Zambia: Honest Concurrent Use or Special Circumstances" } ] }, { "@type": "WebSite", "@id": "https://spoor.com/#website", "url": "https://spoor.com/", "name": "Spoor & Fisher", "description": "", "publisher": { "@id": "https://spoor.com/#organization" }, "potentialAction": [ { "@type": "SearchAction", "target": { "@type": "EntryPoint", "urlTemplate": "https://spoor.com/?s={search_term_string}" }, "query-input": { "@type": "PropertyValueSpecification", "valueRequired": true, "valueName": "search_term_string" } } ], "inLanguage": "zh-Hans" }, { "@type": "Organization", "@id": "https://spoor.com/#organization", "name": "Spoor & Fisher", "url": "https://spoor.com/", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "inLanguage": "zh-Hans", "@id": "https://spoor.com/#/schema/logo/image/", "url": "https://spoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/200210-SP-Logo_RGB-01-screen-scaled.jpg", "contentUrl": "https://spoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/200210-SP-Logo_RGB-01-screen-scaled.jpg", "width": 2560, "height": 813, "caption": "Spoor & Fisher" }, "image": { "@id": "https://spoor.com/#/schema/logo/image/" }, "sameAs": [ "https://www.facebook.com/spoorfisher/", "https://x.com/spoorfisher" ] }, { "@type": "Person", "@id": "https://spoor.com/#/schema/person/7dad7b9bcdd00617832fbe66d90d9c29", "name": "Spoor & Fisher", "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "inLanguage": "zh-Hans", "@id": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/c4170b7e7d52e6175f9816363d8719ca0de7acdec5fead0211250412726afcf9?s=96&d=mm&r=g", "url": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/c4170b7e7d52e6175f9816363d8719ca0de7acdec5fead0211250412726afcf9?s=96&d=mm&r=g", "contentUrl": "https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/c4170b7e7d52e6175f9816363d8719ca0de7acdec5fead0211250412726afcf9?s=96&d=mm&r=g", "caption": "Spoor & Fisher" } } ] } ``` [家](https://spoor.com) › [知识中心](https://spoor.com/knowledge-centre/) › [法律更新/](https://spoor.com/zh/knowledge-centre/legal-updates/) › 赞比亚：诚实同时使用或特殊情况 # 赞比亚：诚实同时使用或特殊情况 斯普尔和费舍尔 - 21 2 月 2019 ### 最近赞比亚上诉法院 (CA) 商标判决， 美国马球协会诉 LA Group Limited（2018 年 12 月 7 日）， 按诚实同时使用或特殊情况办理登记。 《赞比亚商标法》第 17(1) 条规定，基于涵盖相同商品或商品描述的在先注册的驳回。然而，第 17 (2) 条规定，注册官可以允许注册否则会被拒绝的商标 *“在诚实同时使用或其他特殊情况的情况下。”* 问题是美国马球协会是否有权在第 18 类和第 25 类中注册马球运动员设备标志，因为 LA Group 较早注册了相同类别的马球运动员设备标志。注册官根据第 17 条第 (2) 款允许注册。这件事最终找到了 CA。 CA 一开始考虑了一些欧洲判例，包括著名的 *Sabel BV v Puma AG Rudolf Dassler Sport。* 它说必须意识到混淆的可能性 *'全球' *并通过眼睛 *'普通消费者*'，谁通常'*将商标视为一个整体，而不去分析其各种细节*.'它说评估必须是 *'参考商标创造的整体印象，同时牢记其独特和主要组成部分。*'它说一个 *“商标之间较小的相似程度可能会被商品或服务之间较大程度的相似所抵消，反之亦然。”* 说到货物，它说你需要考虑货物的用途，物理性质和贸易渠道。 CA 随后做出了以下观察： *“我们认为，公众可能会误认为商品的原产地，这可能会造成混淆。商标的主要功能是区分或识别市场上的产品或服务。需要注册的标志与已经注册的标志不同是可取的。* CA 谈到商标时这样说：他们 '*共享共同点'，* 他俩 '*描绘马球比赛'，* 一个显示 '*一个手持木槌在空中的骑手装置'，* 另一个 '*两名马球运动员（骑马装置）在空中举着木槌/球杆。* 通讯局同意根据第 17(2) 条进行注册是适当的。它提到新加坡的一项决定， *Future Enterprises Pte Ltd 诉麦当劳，* 法院认为'*除非存在重大原则错误，否则上诉法院不应干扰商标法庭的事实认定。* 法庭是这样说的：'*分析了所提出的理由后，我们不能责怪注册官……他考虑了特殊情况，即对方的商标已经取得了足够的商业成功，以便与申请人的后续商标和事实脱颖而出并区别开来。事实证明，在其他司法管辖区，即美利坚合众国、德国、英国和日本，这些商标的共存是可以实现的。它接着说，它可以“司法注意这样一个事实，即无论是否涉及第 18 类和第 25 类涵盖的商品，全球许多带有“polo”一词的商标都已注册。* 有些人可能会惊讶于发现“*商业成功'* 与其他国家共存构成“*特殊的情况'* 那个权证登记。特别是因为 CA 也明确承认属地原则，当它说“*众所周知，知识产权具有地域性，即仅在其注册的地域内有效。* 但赞比亚法院确实做出了一些有趣的决定。近年来，我们看到赞比亚法院认为商标申请不能根据普通法或未注册的权利提出异议。我们已经看到另一家法院可以说承认国际注册在赞比亚无效，因为该国未能将《马德里议定书》适当地纳入其国内法。 值得注意的是，自 2011 年以来，新的赞比亚商标法一直在酝酿之中。虽然这项拟议的立法将极大地使赞比亚商标法现代化，但诚实同时使用的概念似乎仍将保留。 [联系我们](mailto:info@spoor.co.uk) 了解更多信息