# Trademark Similarity: Reviewing Judicial Reasoning

Baby powder, baby oil, cosmetic cream, hand cream, cosmetic brushes, skin milk, nourishing cream, cold cream, powder containers and powder puffs.

Source: https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/964524

HOME / NEWS & INSIGHTS NEWS & INSIGHTS Trademark Similarity: Reviewing Judicial Reasoning Baby powder, baby oil, cosmetic cream, hand cream, cosmetic brushes, skin milk, nourishing cream, cold cream, powder containers and powder puffs. Trademarks 2023.12.06 published IPLEX 2 min read 2002 Hu 1621(dismissed) Category Cited mark Registered mark at issue Mark Designated Goods Baby powder, baby oil, cosmetic cream, hand cream, cosmetic brushes, skin milk, nourishing cream, cold cream, powder containers and powder puffs. Perfume, eyeshadow, eyebrow pencils, skin lotion, hairspray, hair mousse, lavender oil, compact powder, cosmetic brushes and manicure sets [Similarity of the marks] The registered mark consists of “dodo, professional, make and up”. PROFESSIONAL means professional or, by implication, very good, while MAKE UP means cosmetics. Korean consumers would understand “professional cosmetics” or “very good cosmetics”, describing the quality or effect of the designated goods. Those elements lack distinctiveness, leaving DODO as the dominant element. Although it might be pronounced “dudu” by association with the English verb DO, the unspaced word DODO would predominantly be pronounced “dodo”. The cited mark’s Korean wording can be separated from its graphic and shortened to the same pronunciation. The marks are therefore phonetically identical and similar overall, without needing further comparison of appearance or concept. [Designated goods] The marks covered identical or similar cosmetics under Class 12 of the former Korean goods classification. [Decisions] The registered mark could be perceived by its dominant element, which had the same pronunciation as the cited mark. The similar goods reinforced the finding of similarity. 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: GINGANET versus ZINKA ↗ Older Trademark Similarity Case Analysis: now ↗ 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/964524
- 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/964927
- https://www.iplexlaw.co.kr/en/blog/963243
- 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