Monfort Control of Trademark Upheld in Korea; Former Employee's Claims Rejected by Korean Examiner.CHICAGO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 3, 1999-- Monfort, Inc. of Greeley, Colo., has been confirmed as the rightful owner of trademark rights to the Monfort name in Korea after an exhaustive review by the Korean Industrial Property Office (KIPO KIPO Korean Intellectual Property Office ). Monfort had been embroiled em·broil tr.v. em·broiled, em·broil·ing, em·broils 1. To involve in argument, contention, or hostile actions: "Avoid . . . in a lengthy dispute with former Monfort employee Gapsu Kim, who in 1992 deceptively de·cep·tive·ly adv. In a deceptive or deceiving manner; so as to deceive. Usage Note: When deceptively is used to modify an adjective, the meaning is often unclear. filed in Korea for registration of the Monfort trademark in his own company's name, Monfort Korea, Inc. The KIPO's ruling, which invalidates Gapsu Kim's claim to the Monfort trademark in Korea, states: "Gapsu Kim did not abide by his obligation to faithfully take care of Monfort, Inc.'s business... Such acts of Gapsu Kim...are against the doctrine of faithfulness... Also, Gapsu Kim's behaviors were improper
The KIPO's ruling finds that Gapsu Kim's actions in "registering an imitation imitation, in music, a device of counterpoint wherein a phrase or motive is employed successively in more than one voice. The imitation may be exact, the same intervals being repeated at the same or different pitches, or it may be free, in which case numerous types mark" ... "disrupts fair and reliable business order." KIPO concludes that Gapsu Kim registered the mark "without proper authorization The right or permission to use a system resource; the process of granting access. See access control. of Monfort, Inc. and the said mark (Monfort Korea) was an imitation mark which was registered with the intent of free-riding on the goodwill and intangible values of the cited mark (Monfort)." "We placed our trust in an employee who took advantage of that trust," said David Levine, executive vice president of Monfort, Inc. "This thorough review by the KIPO has set the record straight and delivered a message that this type of business practice will not be tolerated, either in the United States United States, officially United States of America, republic (2005 est. pop. 295,734,000), 3,539,227 sq mi (9,166,598 sq km), North America. The United States is the world's third largest country in population and the fourth largest country in area. or Korea." While grateful to the KIPO for its thorough review of the case, Levine also expressed regret for the confusion and concern among Korean consumers that has resulted from Gapsu Kim's claims in this trademark dispute. "Monfort has earned the highest reputation in the beef market in and outside America," said Levine. "We will be associated only with individuals who prove themselves trustworthy and will not allow them to take advantage of Monfort's many loyal customers." Levine noted that Korea has been an important market for Monfort since the 1970s. In the early 90s, Monfort became the first U.S. beef company to establish an office in Korea. Today, Monfort supplies roughly 10 percent of all beef and more than 25 percent of American beef imported into Korea. The KIPO decision is consistent with Monfort, Inc.'s position in a California lawsuit filed against Gapsu Kim and others. Monfort intends to vigorously pursue its legal remedies A legal remedy is the means by which a court of law, usually in the exercise of civil law jurisdiction, enforces a right, imposes a penalty, or makes some other court order to impose its will. In Commonwealth common law jurisdictions and related jurisdictions (e.g. under United States law. |
|
||||||||||||||

Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion