(By You Yunting) In China, there are two apps similar with Uber, i,e, Didi Taxi and Kuaidi Taxi. According to news reports, recently, a Hangzhou-based company wondered that Didi Taxi (English-transliterated from Chinese“嘀嘀打车”), a popular taxi booking apps in China, has infringed the exclusive right to its trademark under Class 9. (note: the link is in Chinese). But the operating company of Didi Taxi has no response.
(ByYou Yunting) Yesterday we explained the legal status of WeChat LiCaiTong and the exemption clauses of Tencent in Could Tencent be Exempt from Compensation for Losses of WeChat LiCaiTong ? Part 1. We will continue to analyze this in today’s post.
III. Could Tencent be exempted from liability for the risks of losses?
If any losses arise from the purchase from LiCaiTong, purchasers shall assume responsibilities in accordance with Tencent’s agreements. In my opinion, however, WeChat does not disclose the risks of LiCaiTong completely. Therefore, Tencent will not necessarily be exempt from its liabilities.
(ByYou Yunting) Abstract： Tencent will make no compensation to WeChat users who lost all their money in purchasing its LiCaiTong (an online financial services product) in accordance with Tencent’s Users Agreement. However, where the mobile client system of WeChat’s LiCaiTong is so simple that WeChat users are deliberately not informed of the fund name before making investments and where WeChat discloses the risk of higher interest rates in an overly optimistic way, were there any loss in the view of LiCaiTong, Tencent will face the risk of assuming compensation liability on the grounds of its fault of inadequate risk disclosure.
(By Albert Chen) In yesterday’s post, we analyzed why Tencent would confront with the trademark squatting, and mainly blamed it for the defect on the internal management. Today, we would continue our discussion, and share our opinions on how could Tencent take back or stop the first application by others.
Before the end of this year, no one would oppose “iPad battle” shall be the trademark dispute of the year, and yet with the breaking out of conflict on the trademark of “微信”, a LBS software from Tencent Inc. (the “Tencent”) and its English name is WeChat, that affirmation would be challenged.
(By You Yunting) In recent, several medias have interviewed the author on the squatting of “微信” trademark, which is the name of a LBS software of Tencent Inc. (the “Tencent”), and the English name of it is WeChat. The story of it is: A company admitted in Beijing (the “Beijing Company”) made its trademark application of “微信” in Class 38 on 17th January of 2011. Tencent, who runs WeChat (“微信”) software, made its own application several a week later on 24th. For the first application principle, Tencent’s application has been refused by the authority. And part of Beijing Company’s application has also been refused, while part of it was opposed. Currently, WeChat (“微信”), the hit product of Tencent, is with no any records in Class 38, which is the most related class for the app.