The Secretary of State to
the French Chargé d’ Affaires ad
interim.
Department of State,
Washington
,
October 15,
1906
.
No. 342.]
Sir: In my note of the 17th of February last I
had the honor to inclose a copy of a memorandum regarding the protection
of trademarks in China, in reply to the memorandum of the German
ambassador of January 18, 1906. In a note of the 12th of May the German
ambassador submitted some remarks of his Government on this memorandum,
which have had my careful consideration, and I have now written to the
German ambassador that this Government is prepared, on certain
conditions, to withdraw its objection to section 25 of the project for
the protection of trade-marks in China formulated by the representatives
at Peking of Germany, France, Italy, Austria-Hungary, and Great Britain.
I have the honor to inclose for your information copies of these two
notes.a Upon the acceptance by the
Governments named of the addition to article 7 as stated to the German
ambassador, the American minister at Peking will be instructed to agree
to the project formulated by the representatives of the above-mentioned
powers.
Accept, sir, the renewed assurances of my high consideration.
aide mémoire (from
the german embassy).
Washington
,
November 2,
1906
.
On April 23 of last year Mr. Rockhill informed the German minister in
Peking and through him the representatives of Great Britain, France,
and Austria that the United States Government found the project of a
measure for the protection of trade-marks in China unobjectionable
in any material regard excepting the proposed section 25, which
reads as follows:
“All demands of registration made by means of the competent Chinese
authorities before the going into force of the present regulations
shall be considered as having been made the day of the regulations
going into force.”
It was contended that this section might destroy the effect of
registration filed by American owners of trade-marks under the
trademark regulations heretofore published, and that the effect of
such regulations should, in fairness to such owners, therefore not
be impaired.
The representatives in Peking concerned in the elaboration of this
project have given their most earnest consideration to the objection
raised by Mr. Rockhill against section 25, but in view of the
instructions received from their respective Governments were, to
their great regret, unable to assent to the modification suggested
by the State Department, by which such registrations filed at an
anterior date should rank according to their priority.
The Imperial Government sees grave grounds for apprehension if
section 25 is omitted or modified. The object of this article is to
[Page 258] prevent such persons
who are able, in consequence of the favorable geographical proximity
of their country, to proceed immediately after publication of this
trade-mark law with the registration of trade-marks to take undue
advantage of such persons who, living at a greater distance, receive
later information of this law and can only register their
trade-marks after a longer lapse of time. The Imperial Government
appreciates the view of the State Department that a certain number
of American firms who have already effected their demands of
registration might be in a better position, if the provisions of
priority were based on the priority of date made under the trademark
regulations heretofore published as suggested. It is pointed out, in
connection with this, that several European firms are in this same
position. In the opinion, however, of the Imperial Government such
minor considerations should have no weight as opposed to the general
disadvantages which would evolve from such admission of the
principle of priority and which would affect the great, bulk of
distant firms concerned in trade with China. There seems to be no
doubt on this head that the interests of the United States move on
the same lines as those of the other powers concerned. It is
earnestly hoped, therefore, that the United States Government, after
further consideration of the matter, may waive their objections with
regard to section 25 of the proposed regulations and assent to the
principle of delayed priority as provided for by that article.
