CANON KABUSHIKI KAISHA vs.

CA
G.R. No. 120900, July 20, 2000
J. Gonzaga-Reyes

PETITIONER: CANON KABUSHIKI KAISHA

RESPONDENTS: COURT of APPEALS and NSR RUBBER CORPORATION
In cases of confusion of business or origin, the question that usually arises is whether the respective goods or services of the senior user
and the junior user are so related as to likely cause confusion of business or origin, and thereby render the trademark or tradenames confusingly
similar.

FACTS:
On January 15, 1985 , NSR Rubber Corporation applied for the registration of the mark CANON for
sandals in the Bureau of Patents, Trademarks, and Technology Transfer. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, a foreign
corporation filed a Verified Notice of Opposition, alleging that it will be damaged by the registration of the
trademark Canon in the name of NSR.

Canon Kabushiki Kaisha presented as evidence, its certificate of registration of the mark CANON in
various countries covering goods belonging to class 2. This includes paints, chemical products, toner, dye stuff.
It also submitted as evidence its Philippine Trademark Registration No. 39398.

The BPTTT, on November 10, 1992, rendered its decision favoring NSR’s application for the
registration of the trademark CANON. Canon Kabushiki appealed to the CA which affirmed the BPTTT’s
decision.

ISSUE:
WoN CANON KABUSHIKI KAISHA IS ENTITLED TO THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE
MARK CANON BECAUSE IT IS ITS TRADEMARK AND IS ALSO USE FOR FOOTWEAR

HELD:
NO. Ordinarily, the ownership of a trademark or tradename is a property right that the owner is
entitled to protect. However, when the trademark is used by a party for a product in which the other party
does not deal, its use on the latter’s product cannot be validly objected to.

Canon Kabushiki, in its certificate of registration is using the trademark CANON for its paints,
chemical products, toner, and dye stuff, goods classified as class 2. On the other hand, NSR is registering the
trademark CANON for its sandals, classified as class 25. There is a great difference between the two classes
of products and the petitioner has not made known its intention to venture into the business of producing
sandals.
The two classes of products are so different to cause confusion to the purchasing public because they
are not related.. Goods are related when they belong to the same class or have the same descriptive
properties; when they possess the same physical attributes or essential characteristics with reference to their
form, composition, texture or quality. They are also said to be related when they serve the same purpose and
are sold in grocery stores. Products of Canon Kabushiki are sold in chemical stores while that of NSR Rubber
are not.
The likelihood of confusion of goods or business is a relative concept, to be determined only
according to the particular, and sometimes peculiar, circumstances of each case.

SC: DENIED the instant petition for review on certiorari.