马来西亚新商标法案亮点

2019年12月27日，马来西亚的《2019商标法案》（以下简称“新法案”）正式生效。这是具有重要意义的里程碑，因为新法案对马来西亚商标立法作出了实质性并被期待已久的改变，使马来西亚的商标系统与现有国际标准相匹配。
Malaysia's Trademarks Act 2019 (“New Act”) recently came into force on 27 December 2019. This is a significant milestone as the New Act introduces several substantial and long-awaited changes to the trade mark legislation in Malaysia and aligns Malaysia's trademark system with current international standards.
新法案的亮点
Highlights Of The New Act
1.加入《马德里议定书》
Madrid Protocol
在颁布新法案的同时，马来西亚加入了《马德里议定书》。因此，马来西亚商标申请人可以提交国际申请书，在马来西亚以外的商标申请人可以在国际注册申请中指定马来西亚。如今除了缅甸外，东盟所有国家都是《马德里议定书》的成员。
Concurrent with the introduction of the New Act, Malaysia acceded to the Madrid Protocol. Applicants in Malaysia can thus now file international applications, and Applicants outside Malaysia can now designate Malaysia in an international application. Save for Myanmar, all of the ASEAN countries are now members of the Madrid Protocol.
2.申请非传统商标与集体商标
Application For Non-Traditional Marks And Collective Marks
现非传统商标（例如形状商标、包装商标、颜色商标、声音商标、气味商标、全息商标、定位商标、动作商标）和集体商标在马来西亚都是可申请注册的。
Non-conventional marks (such as shape marks, packaging marks, colour marks, sound marks, scent marks, hologram marks, positioning marks and motion marks) and collective marks are now registrable in Malaysia.
3.适用一标多类申请
Multi-class Applications Are Available
以往的立法只允许一标一类申请，为促进保护横跨数个类别的商品和/或服务的标志，新法案引入了一标多类申请。新法案中还规定了申请商标分割和合并的条款。
While the old system only permitted single-class applications, the New Act introduces multi-class applications to facilitate the process of protecting a mark across several classes of goods and/or services. Provision has also been made for the division and merging of applications and registrations.
4.手续
Formalities
新法案中规定若不遵守官方要求形式手续，商标申请日将延后到完成补正的日期。因此，在递交申请时提供的所有信息都是非常重要的，包括任何外国商标的翻译和音译。对于集体商标和证明商标的申请，同样必须在两个月内递交以避免申请日被延迟。
The New Act expressly provides that in the event that formalities are not complied with, the filing date will be deferred to such date that the non-compliance has been remedied. It is important for all information to be included at the time of filing, including the translation and transliteration of any mark in a foreign language. For collective mark and certification mark applications, the rules must also be filed within two months to avoid a later filing date being issued.
5.初步咨询及查册
Preliminary Advice And Search
商标注册处为申请人提供选择，让他们在递交商标申请前可向注册处申请初步咨询及查册。申请人在取得报告后，若以与他人相同的资料申请商标，商标注册处可发出临时拒收通知书，并退还申请费用。
The Registry has introduced an option for applicants to apply to the Registry for preliminary advice and search, prior to submitting a trade mark application. If an Applicant files a trade mark application using the same details after obtaining a clear report, he may obtain a refund of the filing fees if a notification of provisional refusal is subsequently issued.
6.侵权行为界定
Acts Amounting To Infringement
在旧法中，商标侵权行为是指在相同商品和或/服务上使用与已注册商标相同或类似商标的行为。现今新法案规定商标侵权可建立在类似商品和/或服务或者可能导致令人混淆的相似。
The old law provided that trademark infringement only occurs if an identical or similar mark is used on goods and/or services which are identical to that covered by the earlier mark. The New Act now allows for trademark infringement to be established even in cases where the goods and/or services are not identical but similar, and such similarity give rise to a likelihood of confusion.
7.恶意侵权警告信的救济
Remedies For Groundless Threats Of Infringement
新法案赋予收到恶意侵权警告信的受害者向法院寻求救济的权利。因此，当你需要发出信函的时候需谨慎对待。
The New Act provides for aggrieved party to seek remedies for groundless threats of infringement. Caution should thus be exercised when issuing letters of demands.
8.注册商标的撤销
Revocation Of Registration
新法案增加了撤销注册商标的事由。如今，若商标权利人不采取措施导致注册商标成为通用名称，或者商标在商品或服务的性质、质量或来源方面误导公众的，注册商标可能会被撤销。
The New Act expands the grounds for revocation of a registered mark. It is now possible to revoke a registration where the mark has become a common name in trade due to the acts of inactivity of a registered proprietor, or where the use of such mark misleads the public as to the nature, quality or geographical origin of the goods or services.
9.过渡性条款
Transitional Provisions
在新法案生效之前提出且未审批的申请将适用旧法。但是，如果在新法案生效起两个月内提交的申请，申请人可选择要求适用新法案。对于在2019年12月7日或之后到期的商标续展，将适用新法案的续展费用。
Pending applications filed before the commencement of the New Act will be examined under the old law. However, there is an option to request that such an application be considered and examined under the New Act, provided that the request is filed within two months of the commencement of the New Act. For trade mark renewals due on or after 27 December 2019, the new renewal fees will be applicable.
执行
Enforcement
1.范围
Sope Of Enforcement
在旧法中，商标侵权是指在相同商品或服务上使用与已注册商标相同或令人混淆的类似商标的行为。新法案扩大了商标权利人的保护范围，将在类似商品或服务上使用已注册商标导致公众混淆的列为侵权行为。
Under the existing system, trademark infringement would only be established if an identical or confusingly similar trademark is used for the identical goods or services for which the earlier trademark is registered. The New Act expands a registered proprietor's scope of enforcement by providing that use of a similar sign in relation to goods or services similar to those registered for will amount to infringement if this results in a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public.
2.刑事犯罪
Criminal Offences
此外，新法案还对未经授权使用注册商标的刑事犯罪作出了新规定，包括对注册商标的虚假申请和虚构未注册商标已经进行注册。违者可被处以罚款和/或监禁。
Further, the New Act contains new provisions on criminal offences relating to unauthorised use of registered trademarks, including the false application of a registered trademark and false representation that a mark is a registered trademark. Offenders may be subject to fines and/or custodial sentences.
3.恶意警告的救济
Remedies For Groundless Threats
新法案还引入了收到恶意侵权警告的可适用救济。受害者可以向法院申请他人的警告是不正当的，要求他人禁止继续发出此类警告，或主张损害赔偿。
The New Act also sets out the remedies available in respect of groundless threats of infringement proceedings. An aggrieved person may apply for a declaration that the threats are unjustifiable, an injunction against the continuance of the threats, or damages.
总结
Conclusion
对马来西亚市场有兴趣的品牌所有者可期待在商标保护框架方面增加灵活性和明确性，并可能希望他们在该司法管辖区内的保护策略能重新审查。
Brand owners with an interest in the Malaysian market can look forward to increased flexibility and clarity in relation to the trademark protection framework and may wish to re-examine their protection strategies in this jurisdiction.