Why QQ Pinyin suffered due to Unfair Competition from Sogou Pinyin?

TM截图未命名

(By You Yunting) Abstract: Although the Advertising Law stipulates that advertisements may not make excessive use of superlatives in advertising products and services, a business operator using absolutist phrasing and imagery alone is insufficient to find one guilty of unfair competition. Although it is true that many methods of advertising on the Internet are not yet clearly defined in the laws, if a company’s methods would be considered to go beyond those of a normal business practice, it can be assured that those operators may face the possibility of lawsuits and possible criminal actions.

READ MORE

Why could China’s Courts Decide for Audi’s “TT” to Apply for a Trademark?

TM截图未命名

(By Luo Yanjie) Abstract: as for whether trademarks are similar, many times, it is decided on the subjective cognition of the judge. Furthermore, considering the fact of the distinctiveness of a trademark, whether the “TT” trademark has distinctiveness is still in doubt.

Automobile models are always composed of simple numbers and English letters. Sometimes manufacturers of bestselling cars once hoped to register these simple models as trademarks but all failed (for example, A6, A4, etc.). However, Audi canceled the rules handled down by the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board through administrative litigation processing, thus possibly obtaining trademark registration:

READ MORE

Four Problems of China Supreme Court‘ s Judicial Interpretation on Crackdown of Web Rumor

(By You Yunting) Recently, the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate jointly issued the Interpretations on Some Issues Concerning the Application of Laws for in the Handling of Defamation via Information Networks and Other Criminal Cases (hereinafter the “Judicial Interpretation”).

Upon reading the whole text of the Judicial Interpretation, in the author’s opinion, this Judicial Interpretation has a bad negative impact upon the rule of law and freedom of speech rather than the positive value of cracking down on web rumors and purifying the environment of internet, because of considering that this Judicial Interpretation attempts to use the idea of “governing the country with severe law during the trouble times” to solve the web rumors so that current crackdown against web rumors is too hard and the legislative proceedings of this Judicial Interpretation are defective .
II. The Problem in Violation of the Principle of Legality

READ MORE

Infringing Goods shall not be Determined as Well-Known Goods

图片1

Abstract: Under the circumstances of prior trademark rights on the same goods, determining similar trade name used by another person as the special name belonging to a well-known commodity shall be limited. Furthermore, the courts shall necessarily review the ownership of prior trademark as the fact of a case.

(By Luo Yanjie) The special name belonging to a well-known commodity is a protective approach for an unregistered trademark. In particular, the special name shall have no severability itself; otherwise, it shall be limited. In today’s post, we will introduce a case with this element with the following analysis:

READ MORE

Why Procter &Gamble’s “Pantene” Trademark cannot Obtain Cross-Protection?

图片1

(By Luo Yanjie) Abstract: Only if another trademark would “mislead the public and injure the interests of the registrant of a well-known trademark, the well-known trademark could obtain “across protection”. The court shall apply on leniency protective conditions of “injure the interests of the registrant of a well-known trademark” to cross-protection for well-known trademark.

Generally speaking, the well-known trademark can get the trademark cross protection, in particular, the “cross-category” does not mean that the well-known trademark can obtain only related categories’ protection , not all categories. A case in our today’s post is about a well-known trademark failure to get the cross protection sharing with readers as follows,

READ MORE

Full text of 2013 China Trademark Law

Notice: On August 30, 2013, China issued a new revision of Trademark Law which will come into force on May 1, 2014. We spent a week to translates the new revision of the Trademark Law into English and post it today. If any one needs to reprint our translated revision on web, please note the following content on the reprint page: This law is translated by Bridge IP Law Commentary http://www.chinaiplawyer.com.

                  Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China

   ( Adopted at the 24th Session of the Standing Committee of the Fifth National People ‘s Congress on August 23, 1982, as amended according to the “Decision on the Revision of the Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China”  adopted at the 30th Session of the Standing Committee  of the Seventh National People’s Congress on February 22, 1993, and  the “Decision on the Revision of the Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China” adopted at the 24th Session of  the Standing Committee of the Ninth National People’s’ Congress on October 27 2001, and amended for the third time according to the “Decision on the Revision of the Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China” adopted at the 4th Session of  the Standing Committee of the Twelfth National People’s’ Congress on August 30, 2013 )

READ MORE

Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China (2013, Comparison Version)

Noctie: On August 30, 2013, China issued a new revision of Trademark Law which will come into force on May 1, 2014. We spent a week to translates the new revision of the Trademark Law into English and post it today. If any one needs to reprint our translated revision on web, please note the following content on the reprint page: This law is translated by Bridge IP Law Commentary http://www.chinaiplawyer.com.

To help foreign friends better understanding of Chinese laws, today we would first publish a comparison of different versions between the 2001 version and the 2013 version.

READ MORE

Introduction to China Courts’ Evidence Preservation System in Software Litigation

(By You Yunting) China’s computer software infringement is very severe. In litigations of cracking down on computer software infringement, however, how to fix infringement evidence is always a real problem for right holders. In practice, there are two means of computer software evidence perseveration: one is evidence preservation taken by the right holder, and the other is applying for the court to take evidence preservation.

Right holders always would like to take pretrial evidence preservation in network software infringement, cases of installing infringing computer software in public places such as Internet bar. As for enterprises that use unauthorized software for commercial use in workplaces, however, in most cases, evidence preservation is taken by the administrative authorities of copyright or people’s courts. At present, China’s administrative organization have involved less and less in software infringement litigation, because the mainstream opinion is that administrative organizations shall handle with the cases involving in infringing public interests whereas software infringement cases regarding as civil disputes between right holders of software and unauthorized users of aforesaid software shall be settled down though civil proceedings. In our today’s post, we would like to introduce some legal ground of software pretrial evidence preservation taken by the people’s courts in China.

READ MORE

Introduction to the New Laws and Policies in the Shanghai Free Trade Zone

SH-map_Yangshan-Deep-Water-Port_Pudong-Air_Waigaoqiao-Port_550pix

(By Dr. Qiao Wenbao) On August 22, 2013, the State Council officially approved the establishment of the China (Shanghai) Free Trade Test Zone (the “FTZ”). Compared with regular domestic bonded zones, export-processing zones, and the Qianhai Bay economic zone previously approved, the FTZ is of profound significance upon the degree of openness and the influence of China’s development in the future.

The FTZ occupies an area of 28.78 square kilometers, including the Yangshan Free Trade Port Area, the Waigaoqiao Free Trade Zone, Waigaoqiao Free Trade Logistics Park, and the Shanghai Pudong Airport Comprehensive Free Trade Zone. The FTZ, centered on the Waigaoqiao Free Trade Zone and combined with Yangshan Free Trade Port Area and Shanghai Pudong Airport Comprehensive Free Trade Zone, is quickly becoming the new experimental field in China’s economy, promoting the development of Shanghai’s financial, trade and shipping center.

READ MORE

Can a database be Protected by the Copyright Law in China?

Abstract: in order to be considered a compilation, such works should typically possess a number of characteristics, such as the selection or arrangement of the data, and the originality in the presentation of said data. In other words, compilations generally require a modicum of originality and ingenuity present in order to receive some form of protection as an original work.

(By Luo Yanjie) Generally, the copyright of a database protects the arrangement of the database rather than to the contents. The case in today’s post demonstrates this point, and at the same time, provides a bit of good for thought. The following is the introduction to the case.

READ MORE

An Unregistered Trademark can be Licensed to Another Party for a Fee

图片1

Abstract: An unregistered trademark may lawfully be licensed to another person. If any third party had registered the trademark, the licensor’s actions will constitute a breach of license contract. Except where the licensor has committed obvious fraud, the validity and effectiveness of such a license contract upon unregistered trademarks cannot be denied.

(By Luo Yanjie) Generally, a trademark in a trademark license should be registered before it is licensed to any other party. However, in today’s post, we will discuss a particular case there the trademark licensed was unregistered at the time the license was concluded. After being heard by two courts and the Supreme Court, such a trademark license contract was ruled to be valid. The following is our analysis.

READ MORE

The Exposure Legal Defects of Chinese Crackdown on Online Rumors

(By You Yunting) Recently, Chinese governments have cracked down on the spreading of rumors online, and have arrested some web users for allegedly fabricating or disseminating online rumors. A lot of netizens have voiced their objections that this crackdown suppressed the “proper freedom of speech.” In our opinion, theoretically, online rumors shall better be handled through other means of self-remedy, such as the victims filing civil or criminal lawsuits against the alleged rumormongers. However, government intervention is in some cases a realistic necessity to more effectively crackdown online rumors, because in some cases the victims hurt by online rumors cannot file a lawsuit on their own initiative, often resulting from a failure to discern the rumormonger’s identity.

READ MORE

Trade Secret Litigation Injunction Rulings in China

1

(By You Yunting) According to media reports (note: the link is in Chinese), Eli Lilly and Company and Eli Lilly (China) sued an employee named Huang in the Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People’s Court. That court recently issued the first trade secret litigation injunction in China’s history, and ruled a litigation preservation that prohibited Huang from disclosing, using, or allowing any third party to use 21 documents that were protected as trade secrets by the plaintiff.

Inductions to the Case:

READ MORE

Does Using “Counterfeit Goods” Constitute Trademark Infringement?

1

Abstract: generally, consumers’ acts of purchasing infringing goods are not considered to constitute trademark infringement. However, some limits shall be given by laws and regulations to those that intend to manufacture and sell infringing goods to damage a trademark holder’s legitimate rights and interests. Based on such analysis, we don’t fully agree with the Chinese court’s decision in today’s post.

(By You Yunting) Pursuant to the Trademark Law, infringement refers to “manufacturing and selling” goods or services of a registered trademark without authorization, but does not include consumers’ acts of purchasing and using infringing goods or services. If laws entirely indulge consumers’ infringements, it is not entirely effective in protecting a trademark holder’s legitimate rights and interests. In today’s post, we will discuss a typical case evidencing such legal limitations. Here is our analysis:

READ MORE

What Legal Problems are GSK Scandal Involved within China’s Criminal Law?

1

(By Zhou Wei) On July 11, 2013, the Ministry of Public Security (the “MPS”) issued a piece of news on its official website that some senior executives of GlaxoSmithKline (China) Co., Ltd (the “GSK”) were being investigated for their involvement in serious unspecific economic crimes, demonstrating a scandal with GSK’s involvement in bribery in China. Utilizing currently disclosed information, this post is aimed at analyzing possible alleged criminal charges and criminal liabilities.

READ MORE