Ubeda v. Zialcita
226 U.S. 452 (1913)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Ubeda v. Zialcita, 226 U.S. 452 (1913)

Ubeda v. Zialcita

No. 77

Submitted December 6, 1912

Decided January 6, 1913

226 U.S. 452

Syllabus

One whose registered trademark is manifestly an imitation of an earlier but unregistered trademark cannot restrain a third party from using it.

The Philippine Trademark Act expressly denies the right of one fraudulently using a trademark to recover.

Section 13 of the Treaty with Spain of 1898, protecting industrial property in the ceded territory, will not be construed as contravening principles of morality and fairness and as protecting a trademark fraudulently registered prior to the treaty.

A statute which introduces no new rule is not retrospective.

Even if a trademark be not registered, if it be well known, it is imposition on the public to use an imitation of it.

Even if a statute makes a certificate of trademark conclusive, it must be taken subject to the general principle of law embodied in the statute to the effect that trademarks fraudulently adopted are not protected.

Where it does not clearly appear to the contrary, this Court will assume that the same principles of honesty and fairness prevail in Spain as in our own law.

13 P.R. 11 affirmed.

The facts, which involve the right to use a trademark in the Philippine Islands, are stated in the opinion.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.