Fredco Manu. Corp Vs President & Fellows of Harvard
Fredco Manu. Corp Vs President & Fellows of Harvard
Fredco Manu. Corp Vs President & Fellows of Harvard
Facts:
Issue:
Ruling: YES.
Fredco’s use of the mark “Harvard,” coupled with its claimed origin in Cambridge,
Massachusetts, obviously suggests a false connection with Harvard University. On this
ground alone, Fredco’s registration of the mark “Harvard” should have been disallowed.
Indisputably, Fredco does not have any affiliation or connection with Harvard University,
or even with Cambridge, Massachusetts. Fredco or its predecessor New York Garments
was not established in 1936, or in the U.S.A. as indicated by Fredco in its oblong logo.
Under Philippine law, a trade name of a national of a State that is a party to the Paris
Convention, whether or not the trade name forms part of a trademark, is protected
“without the obligation of filing or registration.” “Harvard” is the trade name of the
world famous Harvard University, and it is also a trademark of Harvard University.
Under Article 8 of the Paris Convention, as well as Section 37 of R.A. No. 166, Harvard
University is entitled to protection in the Philippines of its trade name “Harvard” even
without registration of such trade name in the Philippines. This means that no educational
entity in the Philippines can use the trade name “Harvard” without the consent of Harvard
University. Likewise, no entity in the Philippines can claim, expressly or impliedly
through the use of the name and mark “Harvard,” that its products or services are
authorized, approved, or licensed by, or sourced from, Harvard University without the
latter’s consent.