Bridge IP Law Commentary - Page 16 of 65 - Your Guide to China IP Law！

P&G vs. Vidal Sassoon Hairs School’s Judgment Abstract

Posted on June 4, 2014 by yytbest

(By Luo Yanjie) An enterprise name attempting to use a well-known trademark is quite the norm in China. In today’s post, we would like to introduce a typical case where the courts made a final judgment that the infringer constitutes infringement but does not change its enterprise name. However, the judgment is far from playing its role in the containment of this violation.

Introduction to the Case:

Appellant (Defendant at the first instance): Beijing Royal VIDAL SASSOON Beauty Hair School (the “Royal School”)

China Court Affirmed the Exception for Registration of Geographical Name Trademark

Posted on May 30, 2014 by yytbest

(By Luo Yanjie) According to the Trademark Law, the geographical names of administrative divisions at or above the county level, and foreign geographical names well-known to the public shall not be used as trademarks, except for geographical names that have other meanings or are not geographically-oriented. However, under certain circumstances, geographical trademarks shall, if they are of sufficient distinctiveness as a whole, may be considered to have the requisite requirements of distinctiveness. In today’s post, we will introduce such a typical case for our readers.

Why China Court Decision Requires Software Interface Primary Aesthetics under Protection?

Posted on May 28, 2014 by yytbest

(By Luo Yanjie) Pursuant to the Copyright Law, the works shall be original with primary aesthetics. From this point, most software interface can’t receive protection from the Copyright law, because most software interfaces are designated in a simple arrangement for the purpose of easy-to-use and thus are likely to be considered as lack of “distinctiveness”. The judgment in the following case set forth the theory.

Introduction to the Case:

Appellant (defendant at first instance): Shenzhen Tenda Technology Co., Ltd (the “Tenda”)

China Laws and Regulations Update in May 2014

Posted on May 26, 2014 by yytbest

National Development and Reform Commission of PRC Promulgates Foreign Investment Project Approval and Record Management Rules

The National Development and Reform Commission of the People’s Republic of China promulgated the Foreign Investment Project Approval and Record Management Rules on April 8th 2014. The Rules have effect from May 1st, 2014.

The Rules were made to do away with provisions that mark distinctions between overseas investment in resources and investments in other areas, except for those in connection with sensitive countries, territories or sectors. According to the Rules, the National Development and Reform Commission is entitled to assess and approve the overseas investment projects where Chinese investors contribute no less than USD 1 billion, while those with contributions of less than USD 1 billion by Chinese investors shall be put on record, no matter whether the projects relate to resource development or not. Before the Rules became effective, the minimum amount of Chinese investors’ contribution to overseas investment projects for resource development that the National Development and Reform Commission had the right to assess and approve were USD 300 million and that to other overseas investment projects were USD 100 million.

China Laws and Regulations Update in April 2014

Posted on May 22, 2014 by yytbest

Shanghai Customs Reform the Supervision and Administrative System of the Shanghai Free Trade Zone in Eleven (11) Respects

In response to AQSIQ’s (General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China) issuance of the Notice on Supporting Animals and Plants Inspection and Quarantine Reforms in the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone on March 4^th, Shanghai Customs has launched a series of administrative system reforms in eleven (11) respects, introducing a negative list, entitlements to ‘post customs declaration’, ‘free freight transport,’ ‘unified customs declaration’ , a list of goods applied to simplified import filing procedures, etc. to the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone.

Why China‘s Courts Decided the Enterprise’s Use of “Personal Edition” Software Constitute Non-infringement?

Posted on May 21, 2014 by yytbest

(By Luo Yanjie) Rhino Software Inc. developed the Serv-U software, a kind of widely adopted FTP server terminal software to help the transmission of documents on websites. In recent years, Rhino Software Inc has been continuously trying to enforce its rights against unauthorized use of Serv-U in China, but the results are not satisfied. In our previous Questions and Solutions to Enforcement of Rights Protection By Overseas Software Enterprise in China, we had analyzed the reasons why Rhino Software Inc encountered obstacles in its protection. That the trial version for 30-days free use made Rhino Software Inc unable to the affirmation of infringement was the reason why Rhino Software failed in today’s post.

Could A Prior User Constitute Trademark Infringement against the Exclusive Right Holder of a Registered Trademark?

Posted on May 16, 2014 by yytbest

(By Luo Yanjie) Our former trademark laws had not yet stipulated whether a prior user constituted trademark infringement against the exclusive right holder of a registered trademark. However, the implementation of the update Trademark Law this year solved the problem. In today’s post, we will introduce a typical case concerning the prior user succeeded in competing against the exclusive right holder. Even though the case was judged before the implementation of the update Trademark Law, its judgment was kept pace with legislative purpose of the update Trademark Law.

Is It Invalid to Establish Joint Ventures between Foreign Companies and Chinese Citizens in China?

Posted on May 12, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) Today we would like to introduce a typical case concerning the situation where a Chinese citizen tries to form a joint venture with a foreign individual. Pursuant to Chinese laws and regulations, foreign companies, enterprises, other commercial organizations and individuals (the “foreign investors”) can only form joint ventures with Chinese companies, enterprises and other commercial organizations, rather than with Chinese citizens. For these reasons, the court determined that the contract agreed upon by the Chinese citizens and foreign investors was invalid and each party should undertake the expenses and costs of establishment individually.

Meet Us at INTA Hong Kong

Posted on May 11, 2014 by yytbest

Mr. You Yunting will be attending this year’s INTA annual meeting in Hong Kong, 10th-13th May 2014.

If you would like to meet with the founder of Bridge IP Law Commentary, please email us, marking the subject heading “INTA 2014” and we will be in touch with some proposed times and venues. Or you can call our temporary mobile phone number: +852-69617471 to contact Mr. You directly.

First China Trade Secret Litigation Injunction Ends in Favor of Eli Lily and Company

Posted on May 8, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) We have introduced that Shanghai court issued the first trade secret litigation injunction in China pursuant to the new Civil Procedure Law. Recent, Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court made a judgment in favor of U.S. drug maker Eli Lily and Company and Eli Lily (China), determining that the defendant must cease infringing the trade secret of the plaintiff. In today’s post, we will introduce the abstract the judgment following with our comments.

Introduction to the Case:

Why Tudou.com Failed to Apply for Tudou trademark under Class 41?

Posted on May 5, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) Tudou.com (NASDAQ:TUDO) are connected with trademarks in different kinds of services relating entertainments under Class 41. However, Tudou.com failed to apply for its website name as a trademark by virtue of previous similar trademark. Tudou.com is focusing on providing services of video-sharing and video on-demand, but we found out its major services cannot be applied for trademark protection. Therefore, how to deal with this trademark application puts forward higher requests for trademark lawyers. In today’s post, we will introduce this case and discuss the comments in the following.

The Anti-Monopoly Judgment’s Digest of Huawei vs. InterDigital of China Courts

Posted on April 30, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) The anti-monopoly litigation of Huawei v. InterDigital caused the attention of intellectual property bound in China. Huawei had filed litigations in China accusing InterDigital of discrimination in patent licensing. Recently, Guangdong Higher People’s Court published its rulings in Huawei v. InterDigital. In today’s post, we will present the judgment of this case and address our comments in the following.

Introduction to the Case:

Appellant (Plaintiff in the first instance): Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd (the “Huawei”)

Alert: SoundCloud, Ubuntu and Lots of Famous Brands are being Rush-Registered as Trademarks in China ！

Posted on April 25, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) Recently, a news article sparked concern that the Qihu Investment Co., Ltd (a similar Chinese name to Qihoo 360 Technology Co., Ltd) had rushed-registered hundreds of trademarks belonging to internet venture companies. Even though Qihoo 360 Technology Co., Ltd later clarified that it had nothing with the Qihu Investment Co., Ltd, the news still attracted attention from both companies and lawyers.

Many famous companies’ brands, such as Ubuntu, Hotel Tonight and SoundCloud were being rush-registered as trademarks and some have even entered into the process of announcement by the Chinese Trademark Office after a preliminary examination and within three months of the date of the publication. The overseas companies may lose the exclusive right of trademark in China unless they file an opposition against these rush-registrations. Worse, they will not be able to use these brands they have created when entering the Chinese market for a significant length of time. In today’s post, we would like to address how venture companies should resolve trademark squatting.

Does QVOD Business Model Touch China’s Warning line of Government Regulatory?

Posted on April 24, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) Abstract: The nature of “QVOD Business Model” is that both large and small-sized companies are to jointly infringe online copyrights. Under the facts that large companies provided technology and commerce and then small companies engaged in infringing works, such cooperation set up an environment of competitive advantages resulting from weak regulatory. This cooperation’s true cleverness comes from the deepen understanding of safe harbor rules and the Internet’s globalization and anonymity. If “QVOD Business Model” is continuous operating, such model may be cumulative legal risks and thus is likely that a criminal investigation can make an end of “QVOD Business Model”.

How Many Ways would be Available to Protect Online Copyright?

Posted on April 23, 2014 by yytbest

(By You Yunting) Within the World Intellectual Property Day approaching, Zhihu.com invited me to answer some questions about the popularization of intellectual property rights with the second topic below regarding what channels of online copyright enforcement would be available in China.

Yesterday, we discussed what are the difficulties in the online copyright enforcement in China. With different types of infringement, today I will discuss how to protect online copyright. Actually, there are three channels consisting of online criticism, complaints and litigation.