Trade Marks Registration, (Continued.)
Mr. McNeill—Can Mr. Jamieson tell us what objection there is to there being the same pro registration of all marks entitled to protection? What objection is there to having the same provision for the registration of new marks and for the registration of old marks? Both kinds of marks being entitled to the same proteetion it is not clear to me why both should not be entitled to be regi different fees, instead of some being registered on one list and the others recorded on anoth Mr. Jamieson—The reply is simply one of expense. There are certain firms here who say, I understand, that to register all the marks in vhich they jolaim proprietary rights would mean az expenditure of two or three thousand Mr. McNeill—Why should it not be possible to register them charging a lower feo for old marks Mr. Jamieson—The other point with regard to that arises from the extra. territorial status which all Europeans here enjoy. A firm here may employ a mark which has not been registered in London, but has been in uso here perhaps for twenty-five years. A firm of another nationality may got that mark registered whatever registration office may exist m their own country, and may then say to the Chinese registration office that this mark has been registered by them in Washington or Rome, for instance, and may claim fort full' protection as against the English firm which has using it, but which has not previously registered it in London.
Mr. MeNoill—The difficulty then is of putting marks registered abroad and marks not so registered on the same footing for purposes of registration under the new regulations Mr Jameson—If a mark is registered nbrond you cannot proceed agai Chinese" who fraudulently—ae against of it. Tama -s, but I have tried, as far as I can, to soe through thi mass of difficulties which extraterri toriality introduces and I must confess that these present proposals form, I think, a very satisfactory solution.
Mr. E, 8. Little—I am much obliged to Mr. Jamieson for his explanation, but Lam still not quite clear as to the position of marks registered in a foreign Consulate, but not registered in a foreign country; would they be regarded as marks previously registered abroad The Chairman—No.
Mr. E 8. Littlh—Then they come under the heading of yusly unregistered marks?
Mr. Jomicson—Yes, they are marke in which proprietary rights are claimed by reason of the fact that they have been previously filed in the British or some other foreign Consulate, but so far as any legal rights are concerned they have nom Mr. E. 8. Little—Even though they have boon recorded in a Taotai's yamen?
Mr. Jamicson—No, not so far as the British authorities are concerned T don't know what the French or Ameri. can Consulates would do, at the last meeting ject Mr. Scott had a good deal to say on the subject of fees. Do I understand that the original scale of fees has been eliminated, und that now there are only two classes of fees, one of ton taels and one of five Under the original proposals the of fees included one of s much as thirty taels and serious objection was taken to the ruinous nature of these foes. Has that been changed or has that question been entirely shelved Mr. Jamieson—It is with some diffidence that I got up again, but if Mr. Little will look at Resolution III he will see what he wants, (Mr. Jamieson read the Resolution.) In the letter which the Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce addressed to Sir Ernest Satow this question of fees was very prominently brought forward. The diplomatic Body, or the Representatives of the Powers interested, will make suggestions probably along those lines. If the fees are reduced "tant mieux;" if not, I do not see what the present owners have to complain of,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.