# Comparing Dominant Trademark Elements: CIRCLE SURROUND AUTOMOTIVE versus CIRCLE

For a mark combining symbols, words, graphics or colors, the general approach assesses the appearance, sound and meaning of the mark as a whole.

Source: https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/773092

HOME / NEWS & INSIGHTS NEWS & INSIGHTS Comparing Dominant Trademark Elements: CIRCLE SURROUND AUTOMOTIVE versus CIRCLE For a mark combining symbols, words, graphics or colors, the general approach assesses the appearance, sound and meaning of the mark as a whole. Trademarks 2023.01.03 published IPLEX 3 min read 2008 Hu 1470 Trademark refusal [General principles of similarity assessment] Composite marks are ordinarily assessed through the appearance, pronunciation and concept of the whole. A distinctive dominant element may be considered separately where the components do not form an inseparable combination. [Applied-for mark] Designated Goods: AM/FM Radio Receiver, MP3 Player, etc. [Comparison mark] Designated Goods: Portable Telecommunications Equipment [Summary of the court decision] 1. Similarity of the composite marks “SURROUND” suggests surround sound or a surround system, while “AUTOMOTIVE” describes the intended automotive use of the radio receivers. Both elements are weakly distinctive. “CIRCLE” does not directly describe the goods and can function as the dominant element. Its pronunciation and concept are similar to those of the comparison mark “Circle”, creating a likelihood of confusion on identical or similar goods. 2. Designated Goods. Although their physical forms differ, portable communications equipment increasingly incorporates multimedia functions such as AM/FM radio and MP3 playback. The goods may be produced by the same manufacturers and sold through the same outlets. The applied-for mark covers goods including AM/FM radio receivers and MP3 players; the earlier mark covers portable communications equipment. Their production and sales channels and consumer groups overlap. Use of identical or similar marks could therefore suggest a common manufacturer or seller, supporting similarity of the goods. 3. Conclusion The marks have similar dominant elements and designate similar goods. The court found them similar. Read the Korean source This article reflects the information available when it was published. Contact us to discuss your circumstances. Discuss this topic ↗ All articles Related service: Designs & trade marks ↗ Related service: IP disputes & appeals ↗ TALK TO IPLEX Discuss your IP questions We consider your technology and business needs together. ↗ Contact us Newer Trademark Similarity Case: NOVATEX ↗ Older Technology-Based Special Listing: A Consulting Case ↗ Related insights Trademarks 2026.10.01 TikTok for confectionery: dilution can prevent registration in Korea Korean Patent Court case 2025Heo10379 explains why different goods and later commercial success did not overcome the reputation and distinctiveness of TikTok. ↗ Read article Trademarks 2026.09.30 Can Fear of a Trade Mark Dispute Justify Non-Use? Korean Supreme Court decision 2024후10504 separates an intention to launch from actual use and objective obstacles beyond the owner’s control. ↗ Read article Trademarks 2026.09.29 An App Name: A Mark for Software or for the Service It Delivers? The 010PAY decision, 2025허10405, considers actual transactions, revenue and the proper subject of Korean trade mark scope proceedings. ↗ Read article

- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/category/trademark
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/forum/view/773092
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/contact
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/ip-solutions/trademark#related-insights
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/ip-solutions/disputes#related-insights
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/contact
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/773293
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/773090
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1782
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1782
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1776
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1776
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1771
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/brunch-case-1771