95. The representative of Korea said with regard to the part a of the second sub-question relating to the national proceedings and the protection of geographical indications and trademarks, one level of substantiation was commonly required when genericness of a term was claimed. According to the criteria used by the Korean Intellectual Property Office, to substantiate the genericness of a term, the following conditions had to be met: that the terms were freely and widely used for goods among many unspecified people such as producers and suppliers as a consequence of the geographical indication or trademark having lost its function to identify the origin; and that the right holder of the geographical indication or trademark had failed to take any of the necessary actions for protection.
96. With regard to part b of the second sub-question on the burden of proving genericness or non-genericness, both in the process of application for protection and in the process of challenging a protected term, the burden of proof was on the party claiming genericness, i.e. on the party challenging the validity of the GI registration.
