Case 1: “Strong Carbon Fiber'' is a medium-sized enterprise in a member country of both the

PCT and the Madrid System. It is basically a research-oriented company specializing in the
carbon fiber manufacturing process. Strong Carbon Fiber invented a new carbon manufacturing
process called the reinforced process. Since Strong Carbon Fiber does not have enough funds to
manufacture the carbon fiber product with the new carbon fiber manufacturing process, the
company decided to license this new carbon fiber manufacturing process to existing carbon fiber
manufacturers around the world. The company also decided to market the new product
manufactured by the new process as “Strong and Light.”
Q. 1. Strong Carbon Fiber asks your advice as to whether it would be better to seek patent
protection for this new technology or rather keep the technology as trade secret.
Q. 2. As an IP expert, examine the registrability of “Strong and Light” as a trademark for a
carbon fiber product.

1. Brief Description
- SCF invented a new carbon manufacturing process called reinforced process
- The company decided to license this new process to existing carbon fiber manufacturers
- The company also wanted to market the new product manufactured by the new process as
“Strong and Light.”
2. Background
- Subject matter:
 The reinforced process - a revolutionary method of high quality carbon fiber production:
which is considered to be registered as patent or kept as trade secret
 “Strong and Light” which is considered to be registered as trademark
- Owner
Question 1
a. Definition
- Invention means a technical solution in the form of a product or process which is intended
to solve a problem by application of natural laws. (Article 4.12, IP Law). An invention shall
be protected by a Patent for invention if it meets 3 conditions:
(a) It is novel;
(b) It is of an inventive nature;
 (c) It is susceptible of industrial application.
- Trade secret means information obtained from activities of financial or intellectual
investment, which has not yet been disclosed and which is able to be used in business
(Article 4.23, IP Law)
b. Strength and weakness analysis
In order to decide whether it is better to seek patent protection for this new technology or
rather keep the technology as trade secret, it is important to analyse strength and weakness of
each to see what is more applicable and beneficial in the case of SCF

Patents Trade Secret

Strength - Exclusive use and can transfer right
to others
- Clear enforcement
Weakness - Must submit the application for
protection registration.
- The application process is 18 months
(Article 119.2a) so requires time to
access and risks of being copied
- Registration and maintanance costs
(Article 94)
- Easily technology copied because of
public disclosure of the information
- Limited in time (20 years), after that
belonging to the public
- Need not to submit the
application for protection
registration
- Immediate effect
- No registration and
maintainance costs
- Limited technology copied
- Other may inspect, dissect,
analyze and discover the
secret and be thereafter
entitled to use
- Complex enforcement

c. Case analysis: Patent is more suitable for the firm because:

- Patent should be used for products/processes that, when placed on the market, are easily
imitated and substituted. Trade secrets should be kept for products/processes that are difficult to
imitate.
- With carbon, the industry innovates and changes quickly and have substitute materials.
Therefore keeping the process information as a secret can be quite challenging. Therefore, it
should be protected as patent so that there is a clear enforcement to protect it.
- Since the company wants to license its innovative carbon process, applying for patents is
crucial in giving the company exclusive right and the ability to transfer the right to other
manufacturers.
- The reinforced process of SCF not subject to the exclusions (more details) and also satisfy three
conditions for protection (Article 58)
 Novel: not yet publicly disclosed (Article 60.3)
 Innovative nature: a revolutionary method of high quality carbon fiber production which
cannot be easily created by a person with average knowledge (Article 61)
 Susceptible to industrial application: this “reinforced process” of manufacturing carbon
can be used in mass production and obtain consistent results (Article 25)

Question 2: Registrability of “Strong and Light” as a trademark

a. Definition
Trademark means a sign used to distinguish the goods or services of different organizations and
individuals.
b. Conditions for protection
A trademark shall be eligible for protection (Art.72-IPL)
- Visible signs: Here the name is “Strong and Light” => satisfy this condition
- Undeceivable (not cause misunderstanding or confusion or which deceive consumers as to the
origin,properties, use, quality, value or other characteristics of goods or services), no contrary to
social ethics => Satisfy
- Not identical or confusingly similar to registered marks => Satisfy
- Distinctiveness: Higher level of distinctivenes means higher registrability. Level is illustrated
(from highest to lowesr distinctiveness) as follows:
  Coined or fanciful words: Unmeaning
 Arbitrary words: meaning but not relevant to the product
 Suggestive: hint attributes of product
 Descriptive: merely descriptive
 Generic
“Strong and Light” have low level of distinctiveness as it is descriptive ( refers to the
characteristics of the product itself, but does not specify any distinctiveness considering that
others in the industry). It also does not have secondary meaning so registrability for “Strong and
Light” is low.
c. Advice
SAL trademark shall be deemed to be indistinctive, hence, so as to register trademark, changes
need to be made so that the sign can be arbitrary or fancifully coined words like
STRIGHT/”Lightstro which has no meaning
 Case 2. Prior to its liberation, Dak Mil District that belongs to Dak Nong province nowadays
was called Duc Lap District, which belonged to Quang Duc province (at present, Duc Lap is
not a geographical name for a local administrative unit). This district has favorable natural
conditions for the growth of coffee. Coffee has been grown in this area since the 1930s and
Duc Lap coffee has long been highly appreciated and exported to markets of EU, America,
Japan, China,… Thanks to geographical characteristics of Dak Mil District such as its soil,
topography, climate, hydrology… as well as the accumulated cultivation experience of local
producers, Duc Lap coffee bears a distinctive color, taste, solubility and caffeine content in
comparison with coffee in other regions. The community of Duc Lap coffee growers and
traders as well as the People’s Committee of Dak Nong province would like to register for
protection of Duc Lap coffee.
a. The People's Committee of Dak Nong asks for your advice as to whether it would be better
to seek a suitable form of protection of industrial property for Duc Lap coffee.
b. Duclap Coffee would be exported worldwide, what advice would you give it about why,
when, where and how to obtain IP Protection internationally (for patent, trademark, industrial
designs, copyright, etc.)

1. Brief Description
Dak Mil has grown coffee from the 1930s until now, in which Duc Lap Coffee is highly
appreciated.
Thanks to favorable natural conditions, Duc Lap coffee has color, taste, solubility and caffeine
content.
Coffee growers and traders in Duc Lap and Dak Nong province want to protect Duc Lap coffee.
2. Background
Subject matter: The geographical name “Duc Lap” is used for the coffee product
Question a
Option 1: Duc Lap coffee can consider to be protected under geographical indication:
- Satisfy the definition: GI means the sign used to identify a product as originating from a
specific region, locality, territory or country (Article 4.22) The sign can be geographical name,
image, logo.
=> Duc Lap coffee is geographical indication, identifying coffee originating from a geographical
area which is “Duc Lap”
- Satisy conditions for protection:
 The product bearing the geographical indication originates from the area, locality,
territory or country corresponding to such geographical indication (Article 79)
o Duc Lap coffee is coffee grown in and originate from the area Duc Lap District,
(Dak Mill, Dak Nong nowadays)
 Has the reputation of quality or characteristics attributable to geographical condition of
area
o Reputation: Have appreciated by consumers in many countries (81.1)
o Quality: distinctive color, taste, solubility and caffeine content in comparison with
coffee in other regions (81.2)
o Characteristics of the area determines the quality (Article 82): favorable typology,
climate, cultivation experience
 Do not belong to exclusions: indications do not belong to generic name in Vietnam.
identical to protected trademark. Misleading consumers as true geographical origin of
goods.
Option 2: Duc Lap coffee can consider to be protected under collective mark
Collective mark: a mark used to distinguish goods/services of members of an organization which
is the owner of such mark from mark from non-members of such organization
Satisfy conditions for protection:
- Satisfy conditions for trademark protection (Article 72):
o Visible signs (Article 74.2): Here the name is “Duc Lap” => satisfy this condition
o Undeceivable and no contrary to social ethics: Duc Lap coffee as a name does not cause
misunderstanding or confusion or which deceive consumers as to the origin,properties,
use, quality, value or other characteristics of goods or services)=> Satisfy
o Distinctiveness: Duc Lap coffee is distighuishable according to Article 74.2 (d) which
indicates that geographical indicator which are not previously registered.
o Not identical or confusingly similar to registered marks => Satisfy
- Satisfy conditions for collective mark (Article 17.4): this mark used to distinguish
producers/traders in Duc Lap and not in Duc Lap
Option 3: Duc Lap coffee can consider to be protected under certification mark
Certification mark: a mark authorized by its owner to be used by another org or individuals on
their (another org & individuals) goods or services to certify certain origin, raw materials,
materials, mode of manufacture of goods or manner of provision of services, and the quality,
accuracy, safety of other characteristics
Satisfy conditions for protection:
- Satisfy conditions for trademark protection (Article 72):
o Visible signs (Article 74.2): Here the name is “Duc Lap” => satisfy this condition
o Undeceivable and no contrary to social ethics: Duc Lap coffee as a name does not cause
misunderstanding or confusion or which deceive consumers as to the origin,properties,
use, quality, value or other characteristics of goods or services)=> Satisfy
o Distinctiveness: Duc Lap coffee is distighuishable according to Article 74.2 (d) which
indicates that geographical indicator which are not previously registered.
o Not identical or confusingly similar to registered marks => Satisfy
- Satisfy conditions for certification mark (Article 4.18): Certification mark “Duc Lap coffee”
can be authorised to cerfify coffee which has those following characteristics:
o Origin: Dak Mil, Dak Nong
o Other characteristics: colour, taste, solubility, caffein, etc.
o Product carrying the mark: Coffee Duc Lap
Comparision
Geographical Collective mark Certification mark
Indication
Advantage Process of registration is at ease
Distinctive and specific
Higher connection to
the geographical area
Protection of local
practices
 Market exclusivity
Unlimited time
Since it belongs to the
government, the
protection is based on
national governance
Disadvantage Requires much Limited time (10 years)
resources in the Lower attachment of product to the region
registration procedures

Conclusion: Duc Lap Coffee can register for either geographical indication, collective mark or
certification mark. Depends on the finance and other resources, they can register collective mark
first before registering GI so that they can accumulate enough resources

Question 2:
How to obtain IP Protection internationally:
Why: Enhance the reputation of goods, Build consumer confidence, Prevent unfair use that can
affect consumers
When: Before the time of exports worldwide. Should not wait until dispute or fraudulent of IP
right exits
Where: in exporting market
How:
● Can register for production in each country separately.
● Regional: some countries have established system for IP protection in a wide range of
countries: EPO, OHIM, ARIPO, etc.
● International: apply registration at WIPO
Case 3: Company A is the owner of the trademark “Viettien” under Trademark Certificate No.
01235 granted by NOIP on 10/3/1995.
On 20/7/2008, on proceeding the export procedure for a container of 100,000 shirts bearing the
trademark “Viettien” and logo, Company A was captured by Customs Authorities of Hanoi and
asked to make a report because of its use of unregistered logo on its products.
After completing its accountability, Company A was allowed to proceed customs clearance
procedures on the condition that for its future consignments, Company A would have to register
the image of logo in parallel with the protected trademark on its products.
a. Was Company A’s use of the trademark “Viettien” along with other signs on its products (Eg:
the formalized logo) considered an act of trademark infringement according to trademark law?
b. Give advice to Company A for the sake of its future exporting activities ?

1. Brief Description
Company A is the owner of the trademark “Viettien” under Trademark Certificate No. 01235
granted by NOIP on 10/3/1995.
Company A was captured by Customs Authorities of Hanoi and asked to make a report because
of its use of unregistered logo on its products.
for its future consignments, Company A would have to register the image of logo in parallel with
the protected trademark on its products.
2. Background
Subject matter:
- The trademark "Viettien"
- The unregistered logo used along the trademark
Owner of the label: Company A
Rights of the owner (Article 125)
- To use or authorize others to use industrial property objects
- To prevent others from using industrial property objects

Question 1: Company A act is not trademark infringement

The use of a trademark means to carry out the following acts:
• Affixing the protected trademark to goods, packages of goods, means for conducting business,
means for supplying services and transactiondocuments in business activities;
• Circulating, offering for sale, advertising for sale, or storing for sale, of goods bearing the
protected trademark;
• Importing goods or services bearing the protected trademark.(A124.5)

The use of unregistered signs on a registered trademark shall be deemed to (Article 129)
a. Not violate trademark law and infringe on trademark rights if:
+ Signs that cannot be protected (ordinary ornaments, common indications, etc.)
+ Signs that no one has registered.
+ Signs that has not been used renownedly
--> Viettien logo satisfies conditions
b. Violate trademark law and infringement of trademark rights if:
+ Using signs identical to the protected trademarks of identical goods or services.
+ Using a sign identical to a protected mark for similar goods or services... if the use may cause
confusion about the origin of goods or services.
+ Using a sign similar to a protected mark for identical/similar/related goods or services... if the
usage may cause confusion about the origin.
+ Using a sign that is similar/related to a well-known mark or sign under the form of a definition,
transcription of a well-known mark, causing confusion about the origin of goods, or giving a
false impression of relationship relationship between the user of that sign and the owner of the
well-known mark.
--> Logo is not identical or similar to any other protected trademark, so it can be used.

Evaluation: The act of using a registered trademark along with the "Vietten" logo on Viettien's
shirts is not considered a violation of the provisions of the law on trademarks and infringes upon
the rights to trademarks.
Question b
- That customs authority made a report and set the obligation to register the logo of Viettien to
the company A's trade mark is not in accordance with the law.
- Although the act of exporting is not considered an infringement of the rights to another person's
trademark and is only handled in the case of exporting counterfeit trademark goods, Company A
still needs to take appropriate measures to ensure smooth export of goods:
- In order to avoid infringing the rights to other people's trademarks, company A should consider
distinctiveness of unregistered signs on the goods' packaging (the V symbol):
+ If such signs are not distinguishable (common signs, presented without stylization) and are not
capable of protecting any person, the use of signs on Viettien is legal (in Vietnam).
+ If such signs are distinguishable, they are likely to be protected as trademarks. It is necessary
to conduct early legal procedures to proceed with protection registration should satisfy condition
for protection: (Art.72-IPL)
o Visible signs
o Undeceivable (not cause misunderstanding or confusion or which deceive consumers as
to the origin,properties, use, quality, value or other characteristics of goods or services),
no contrary to social ethics
o Not identical or confusingly similar to registered marks
o Distinctiveness: Higher level of distinctivenes means higher registrability.
- To import smoothly, other signs on the product packaging need to meet the trademark
requirements in the importing country, namely:
+ Register for protection in that country.
+ Avoid infringing on the rights of others.
Case 4: Marnie has just created new software for automotive brake systems that she wants to
market and hopefully get rich from. She has even come up with a catchy name “safe and sound”.
She is concerned that one of the big high-tech firms may try to steal her idea.
1. What forms of intellectual property protection should she consider ?
2. As an IP expert, examine the registrability of “safe and sound” as a trademark for automotive
brake systems

1. Brief Description
Marine created a new software for automative brake and named it "safe and sound" to prevent
big firms steal her idea
2. Background
Subject matter:
- New software created
- "safe and sound"" as a trade mark
Owner: Marine
Rights of the owner (Patent: Article 58&59; Trademark: Article 129)
- Patents: To have exclusive and monopolistic right of protection with a fee and be used for
purpose of commercial exploitation
- Trademark: To use or authorize others to use industrial property objects and to prevent others
from using industrial property objects "

Question 1: She should register patent protection for her idea

The creation of new software for automotive brake system should be considered as invention:
technical solution in the form of a product or a process which is intended to solve the problem by
application of natural laws (Article 4.12), which should be protected under the registration of a
patent. To be eligible for protection, it should satisfy conditions for patent protection (Article
58):
- Novelty: Not yet publicly disclosed (Art 60.3)
- Creativity: Of innovative nature and iventive progress which cannot be easily created by a
person with average knowledge (Art 61)
- Industrial application: For fabrication and mass production and obtaining consistent result when
repeating application process (Art 25)
=> New software of Marine has not been published anywhere, it also is of innovative nature and
information on the software can be applied industrially: information on the nature of the solution
(new software) can serve mass production as by repeating the process of producing software for
automative brake, identical products can be produced.

- At the same time, it does not violates any of these ineligibility for protection of patent (Article
59):
+ Scientific discoveries or theories, mathematical methods.
+ Presentations of information.
+ Solutions of aesthetic characteristics only.
+ Plant varieties, animal breeds.
+ Processes of plant or animal production which are principally of a biological nature, other than
microbiological processes.
+ Human and animal disease prevention methods, diagnostic and treatment methods.
Conclusion: The creation of new software for automotive brake systems is considered an
invention, specifically in the field of auto manufacturing. Thus, Marnie can apply for protection
in the form of a patent.
With the registration of patent protection, Marnie has the exclusive right to prohibit and prevent
others from using her invention, that is, to prevent other enterprises from imitating technology
and producing similar products. She will have 20 years to make full use of her product without
having to worry.

Question 2: the name "safe and sound" does not qualify to register as a trade mark
The registrability of “safe and sound” as a trademark (a sign to distinguish goods and services of
different organizations and individuals) for automotive brake systems need to meet these
requirements (Article 72 & 73):
+ It must be visible in graphic form (letters, words, drawings…). In this case, “safe and sound” is
presented in the form of words => OK
+ Distinctiveness: Higher level of distinctivenes means higher registrability. Level is illustrated
(from highest to lowesr distinctiveness) as follows:
 Coined or fanciful words: Unmeaning
  Arbitrary words: meaning but not relevant to the product
 Suggestive: hint attributes of product
 Descriptive: merely descriptive
 Generic
=> Safe and sound as it is decriptive (refers to the characteristics of the product itself, but does
not specify any distinctiveness considering that others in the industry can still advertise their
product as “safe and sound” to customers. This will cause certain difficulties if Marnie wants to
protect her product since the name is not highly distinguishable), representing low level of
registrability (Article 74). And also SAS has no secondary meaning that makes it qualified for
condition of trademark protection
+ Not identical or confusingly similar to registered marks => OK
+ Undeceivable (not cause misunderstanding or confusion or which deceive consumers as to the
origin,properties, use, quality, value or other characteristics of goods or services), no contrary to
social ethics. In this case, the product is automotive brake systems which is aimed at protecting
the customers from any possible accidents. Therefore, it does not create misunderstand,
confusion, or deceive the customers at all => OK.
Conclusion: “safe and sound” is not good enough to be qualified as a trademark for Marnie’s
idea to emphasize that she has the exclusive rights to this product. She should come up with
other idea that is more distinctive, such as "Marnie Automotive Brake" as a trademark as well as
a tradename (the name of an organization or individual used in business activities to distinguish
that business entity from other business entities in the same business field and area. The trade
name may be the same as the Brand name to create the ability to distinguish its products from
other similar products in the market, while emphasizing the exclusive right to patent products)
"Case 5: Singer X purchased the song “Vao ha” of musician Y on a monopolistic basis. Her
performance of “Vao ha” came out as great success and received many positive feedback from
the public.
Later on, singer X wrote the 2 nd lyrics for the song based on the melody of “Vao ha”. Was that
considered an act of infringement on the rights of musician Y? If yes, what was the exact
infringed right?
Musician Y uploaded the song “Vao ha” and its lyrics on his own blog. Was that an act of
copyright infringement on the song “Vao ha”, which was transferred to singer X?
Your opinion about this case?"

1. Brief description
2. Background
Subject matter:
The song "Vao Ha" - Owner and Author: Musician Y
Rights of Owner: Moral rights & Economic rights
Moral rights (Article 19):
- To name their works
- To attach their real names/ pseudonyms
- To protect the integrity of their works
- To publish/ permit others to publish
Economic rights (Article 20):
-To create derivative works
- To publicly perform their works;
- To reproduce their works;
- To distribute or import for sale/ transfer other rights to ownership of orginal or copies in
tangible forms;
- To communicate their works to the public by wireless or landline means, electronic information
networks or other technical means;
- To lease the original or copies of cinematographic works and computer programs.
Question 1:
Singer X’s purchase the song “Vao Ha” only gives him the economic right of the original song.
As a result, when he wrote the 2nd lyrics based on the melody of “Vao Ha”, he infringed the right
of musician Y:
- Moral rights: To protect the integrity of their works; and to forbid other persons to modify,
edit or distort their works in whatever form, causing harm to the honour and reputation of the
author (Article 19.4). In this case, even when singer X has purchased the song, moral rights
related to integrity of work still belongs to musican Y (moral rights related to integrity of work is
non-transferable and are available to the authors even after the economic rights are assigned.).
When singer X wrote the lyrics, it may degrade the value of the original song, affecting musician
Y’s reputation and thus infringting this right.

Question 2:
- Case 1: if musician Y uploaded the song and lyrics performed by singer X, musician Y
infringed the copyright assigned to singer X as X has purchased the song and performed on it. As
a result, musician Y must ask for permission of singer X if he wanted to publish the work.
- Case 2: if musician Y uploaded the song and lyrics only (without the voice/sound/recording of
the singer), musician Y did not infringed copyright as musician Y have moral right over the song
and lyrics he wrote. This moral right allows him to publish the work even when singer X has
purchased the song (Article 19)
On 12/3/2012, Company A filed a registration application for its trademark that includes
formalized pinky words above which lies a musical note; the trademark is registered for
classification No. 21 (Cleansing wipes), No. 24 (Handkerchief, towels…) and No. 25 (Scarf,
overcoat). In fact, the Company had started using the trademark Poêmy for classification No. 21,
24 and was planning to expand to category No. 25.
On 22/3/2013, Company A received an official notice document No. 8121/SHTT-NH1 from
NOIP stating their intention to refuse its trademark registration due to the fact that the trademark
in question did not have distinctiveness. To support its decision, NOIP gave 2 examples of
similar registered trademarks:
Trademark Poème, Certificate No. 206243 granted on 6/1/1958, of Triump International AG,
which was registered for product category No. 10 (belt- ceintures de hanches), No. 25
(underware clothes).
Trademark , Certificate No. 15941 granted on 25/12/2006 of Company ABC, which was
registered for product category No. 25.
Question: Give advice to Company A on how to respond to the notice document of NOIP so as
to reserve its registrability for the trademark Poêmy

To assess whether or not a sign sought to be registered and stated in an application is identical or
confusingly similar to another mark (hereinafter referred to as control mark), it is necessary to
compare the disposition, content and pronunciation (for character signs), significance and form
of expression of the sign (for character signs and figure signs), and concurrently compare the
goods and services bearing the sign with those bearing the control mark defined at this Point.
(Article 39.8 Circular 01/2007/TT-BKHCN)
1. Compare the sign Poemy with two registered trademarks

Sign Poemy Poeme Musical note

Disposition Include 5 characters and the 5 characters, different The musical note
musical note in “y” and “e” only

Content No meaning In french, mean poem No meaning

Pronunciation Pô - ê - mi Pô-em No pronunciation

Form of Formalized pink characters with Normal font, no The musical note,
expression the musical note subscript capital, black black

--> The sign Poemy is different from two referenced marks in terms of disposition, content,
pronunciation, form of expressions.

2. Compare the goods and services bearing the sign Poêmy and Poeme and musical note

Comparison of goods/services attached the sign (Point 39.9, Circular 01/2007)

a/ Two goods or two services shall be considered identical if
(i) They have the same nature (composition, ingredients) and the same function and utility; or
(ii) They have similar natures and the same function and utility.

b/ Two goods or two services shall be considered similar if :

(i) They are similar in nature; or (ii) They are similar in function or utility and
(iii) They are marketed in the same commercial channel (they are distributed by the same mode,
or sold together or compete with each other in the same type of shop);
In this case:

 The sign Poemy is registered for classification No. 21 (Cleansing wipes), No. 24
(Handkerchief, towels…) and No. 25 (Scarf, overcoat). In fact, the Company had started
using the trademark Poêmy for classification No. 21, 24 and was planning to expand to
category No. 25.
 The control mark Poeme is registered for category 25 (underwear clothes)
 Consumers may also know that Triump's products International AG is always available in
specialized stores that sell branded products other products of Triump International AG
itself, and are not displayed together with coat and scafts.

--> products registered with the mark Poeme by Triump is not similar or identical to those
of company A registered with the sign Poemy.
  The sign Poemy is registered for classification No. 21 (Cleansing wipes), No. 24
(Handkerchief, towels…) and No. 25 (Scarf, overcoat). In fact, the Company had started
using the trademark Poêmy for classification No. 21, 24 and was planning to expand to
category No. 25.
 The control mark Nhãn nốt nhạc is registered for category 25

--> products in category 25 of Company is identical those of company ABC with Nhãn nốt
nhạc. Other products are not similar

3. Conclusion:

To improve the distinctiveness of the sign Poemy with two registered trademarks, the company
A should get rid of some elements in registration form:

 Remove the sign musical note subscript the Poemy

 Remove the products covered: not registered for group 25 (because in fact they have not
yet used Poemy for this group)

=> With these adaptations, the sign Poemy can be distinctive compared to other two given
registered trademarks (Article 72,73, 74)