“From a contractual perspective, as between the parties, this would seem unlikely. Of course, this will depend on the precise terms of the contract between the venue owner and the meeting planner. More often than not, such contracts would contain provisions relating to the use of trademarks (and other IPRs) by the venue owner and/or the meeting planner. For example, a venue owner would often require the meeting planner to represent and warrant that it has the right to use any trademarks that are proposed to be used at an event, without infringing the rights of any third party. Therefore, in the event of any infringement of a third party’s trademark, the meeting planner would be in breach of the contract, and liable to the venue owner,” says David Swain, partner and head of intellectual property at Lewis Silkin’s Hong Kong. “A venue owner may also have asked for an indemnity from the meeting planner such that, in the event of any third party claim being made against the venue owner for alleged infringement of such third party’s trademark, the meeting planner would indemnify the venue owner in relation to such a third party claim. In this case, although the venue owner may be liable for secondary infringement in certain circumstances, the liability would effectively have been passed on to the meeting planner.”

“On the other hand, a meeting planner may seek a disclaimer that it is not responsible for the use of any trademarks at the venue, in which case, the meeting planner may not be liable to the venue owner, though the meeting planner may still be liable to a third party for infringement of a third party’s trademark,” Swain says. “In this case, although we do not know whether any action will be brought by the trademark owner against the venue owner, ultimately it is clear that venue owners should always seek appropriate legal advice and contractual protection when negotiating with meeting planners.”

Prior to the aforementioned incident, ALLINMEDIA already reported that two beauty contests under the name Miss Asia were recorded last year in China. Immediately after, ATV filed a lawsuit against the alleged violator and an interim injunction order was issued to suspend further events held in the same name.

To avoid more confusion, ATV is revoking the titles of the worldwide contest winners in the years 2016 to 2018.

Before moving everything online, ATV was the oldest conventional television broadcaster in Hong Kong until its termination in 2016.

Johnny Chan