Category Archives: Litigation

How Large Is the Scope of Protection for Well-Known Trademarks in China? (I)

Posted on by
2e2eb9389b504fc29c72b99de5dde71190ef6d7c

 (By Luo Yanjie) Henan Dazhong Paint (Hongkong) Co., Ltd (“Paint Company”), a manufacturer of varnish and paint, recently applied for the trademark “多美滋,” which attracted the dissatisfaction of the International Nutrition Company (“INC”), a globally known Danish infant and children’s nutrition company and the trademark holder of “多美滋DUMEX.” As a result, INC filed an objection to the State Trademark Office (“Office”), but the objection and objection review were both refused by the Office and the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (“TRAB”). After that, INC appealed TRAB’s decision to the Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court. Recently, the Court made its decision and found that “the adoption of the trademark on the paint product could influence the interests of the plaintiff.” Based on this decision, the Court revoked TRAB’s decision to approve the registration of the trademark “多美滋” for paint.

READ MORE

How to Legally and Properly License Trademarks in China ?

Posted on by

The trademark license, as one of the means of using trademarks, has, in practice, encountered many unexpected disputes due to illegal and improper use. How then should one legally and properly license trademarks? And, what may benefits will the rights holder gain after going through the administrative procedures? This essay summarizes the author’s opinions on these issues.

I. How to make the trademark license record

(By Albert Chen) According to the Measures for Recording Trademark Licensing Contracts (“Measures”), the rights holder, either the owner of the trademark or the licensee, or the trademark agency representing these parties shall apply for recordation of the trademark license. If the licensors are foreigners or foreign companies, however, the record must be handled by trademark agencies. In the application, the applicant shall submit the licensing contract recordation application, a duplicate of the licensing contract, and a copy of the trademark certificate. If the documents are in foreign languages, translation shall also be provided.

READ MORE

Could Nike Get the Trademark “Liuxiang”?

Posted on by

(By Luo Yanjie) Recently, the lawsuit filed by Nike against China’s Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (“TRAB”) (note: the link is in Chinese) was heard in the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court. The case was brought because TRAB refused Nike’s application to trademark Liu Xiang (刘翔) for the reason that the trademark had been registered by another company twenty six years ago, namely in July of 1986. At that time, a company named Shanghai Liuxiang Company applied for the trademark Liu Xiang Brand (刘翔牌) in the class of clothing, and the exclusive period for the use of that mark will last until 2017. Incidentally, the Liu Xiang Brand trademark happens to have the same name as the famous Chinese athlete, Liu Xiang. The case is currently being heard, but the author believes Nike has little chance of winning the case. Today’s will examine the issues involved in this case.

READ MORE

How Companies in China Apply for Reserve Trademarks and Defensive Trademarks?

Posted on by

(By Luo Yanjie) A reporter from China Industry & Commerce News asked the author how companies should apply for reserve trademarks and defensive trademarks. The interview is as follows:

1. How to decide between the registration of a reserve or defensive trademark?

Reserve trademarks are prepared for coming new business. Because the period from application to reservation requires one year, it is suggested to prepare some spare names for new products or services being prepared or under research and development. Then, before the product is released, the company can directly select and use a name it has already registered. Generally, it is only necessary to apply for the classes the company intends to adopt, and there is no need to register many other related classes.

READ MORE

What Geographical Names Can be Registered As Trademarks in China?

Posted on by

It is reported that (Note: the link is in Chinese) Wakayama County of Japan recently announced that the trademark application for “Ji Zhou” (纪州) filed by a Hong Kong company on the Chinese mainland concerns a publicly well-know geographical name. The County has also filed an objection with the Chinese Trademark Office because this name is not appropriate to serve as a trademark. The report also stated that Wakayama County has been paying close attention to trademark applications in China since 2010 and has already had two objections granted against trademark applications for “Wakayama.” Today, we would like to discuss whether geographical names can be registered as trademarks:

READ MORE

Does Chinese Trademark Law Permit the Coexistence of Identical or Similar Trademarks?

Posted on by

Last year, the Supreme People’s Court issued the final decision in the protracted dispute between LACOSTE and CARTELO. The decision clarifies cases involving long brand history and could guide future hearings on similar disputes in courts of all levels. In the decision, LACOSTE lost the lawsuit, and no infringement was found on the part of CARTELO. In the judgment, the Court took the first steps towards establishing a system of “trademark coexistence,” which means the coexistence of similar trademarks in the same class, for use in China’s trademark cases. Today’s post will provide an analysis of the application of this system in China.

READ MORE

An International Trade Dispute with Trademark Parallel Import Involved

Posted on by

By Lear Gong

The author recently handled a lawsuit involving trademark parallel import. The case itself was not complicated: a famous American bedding design company (“US Company”) holds trademark A in both China and Japan. The US Company licensed a Shanghai home furnishing company (“Shanghai Company”) to manufacture and sell products marked with trademark A within the territory of mainland China. A Japanese home furnishing company (“Japanese Company”) offered to import trademark A furniture from China to Japan, but demanded a written license from US Company. With the promise from the Shanghai Company, the parties concluded a sales contract, but the clause on the Shanghai Company’s duty to get a license from US Company was not clear. From the time the contract was concluded until the products were delivered, the Japanese Company always urged the Shanghai Company to present it the certificate of license issued by the US Company, but the Shanghai Company did not reply or present the certificate. The Japanese Company moved to terminate the sales contract based on failure to perform. The Shanghai Company then filed a lawsuit against the Japanese Company demanding that it continue performance of the sales contract.

READ MORE

The Judicial Jurisdiction of Network Infringement in China

Posted on by

By Albert Chen

In the post Could Apple Use Objection to Jurisdiction to Prolong the Litigation Period?, we introduced the objection to jurisdiction Apple submitted to the Beijing Second Intermediate Court after it was sued by the China Writers Alliance over downloads in Apple’s App Store. In China, the infringement or tort cases shall be brought to the court of infringement place or the domicile of the defendant, and the infringement place may include the place where the infringement takes place or the place where the consequences of the infringement are felt. With regard to network infringement, could the place where the consequence of infringement is felt include any computer terminal? Today, we will introduce the relevant system.

READ MORE

Different Judicial Opinions from Cases on Name Trademarks and Domain Name Conflicts in China

Posted on by

By Albert Chen

In the first half of this year, our website posted an essay discussing the domain name dispute heard in the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court (“Shanghai Court”) concerning the renowned comedian Zhou Libo. Recently, the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court (“Beijing Court”) decided a very similar case. Yet there were very different standards used to decide the different cases in Beijing and Shanghai. The most critical point is the determination of whether, after receiving the invitation to buy the domain name, the rights holder had bad faith during registration and use of the domain name.

READ MORE

How to Settle Trademark and Trade Name Conflict in China

Posted on by

By Albert Chen

For the prior approval on the company name by the administration of industry and commerce as well as the preliminary examination by the trademark authority in China, no material checks on any conflict against first rights would be conducted. And that has resulted in the numerous conflicts between the trade name and trademark. In today’s post, you could see our opinions on the settlement of the conflict.

I. The administrative way

It is feasible to settle the trademark and trade name conflict through administrative way in China. By Opinions on Several Issues concerning the Settlement on the Conflict between Trademark and Trade Name (the “Opinions”) issued by the SAIC (the State Administration of Industry and Commerce), the conflict occurred within a province shall be settled as in charge of the provincial administration of industry and commerce, and those involves different provinces, shall be settled by SAIC.

READ MORE

Supreme Court Loosened Procedural Standards of Evidences Collected Outside China

Posted on by

By Luo Yanjie

The so-called overseas evidences refer to those evidences developed outside China. In IPR cases, for most right holders are admitted in foreign countries, we have seen a high chance of overseas evidences’ showing up. By Article 11 of Rules on Civil Evidences (the “Rules”):

“If the evidence submitted by the party is developed outside P. R. China, they shall be notarized by the authority where it is collected, and be witnessed by Chinese Embassy or Consulate there; or to be verified through the procedures agreed in the convention between the country and China”.

READ MORE

A Recorded High Objection to Mao Tai’s Trademark Application

Posted on by

By Albert Chen

According to the report, the renowned white liquor distillery Mao Tai’s application of the “Guo Jiu Mao Tai” trademark is facing a recorded huge amount of objections. Since the announcement of its preliminary examination on 20th July, it has seen totaled 95 objections to the applied 4 marks within the 3-months publication. And the objectors have been more than 40 units or individuals. For the case, we once posted an essay on its analysis: “Will Alcohol Trademarks Implying Them the State Liquor Be Registered in China?” For more details of the analysis, please check today’s post.

READ MORE

Key Points to Foreign Company’s IPR Litigation Preparation in China

Posted on by

By Luo Yanjie

With the development of economy, China pays more and more attention to the protection of intellectual property. But whether the patent, trademark or copyright, a lot of high value intellectual property rights belong to foreign companies. Facing the still serious infringing situation, the civil lawsuit is still the most common and reliable means to strike infringement. As for foreign investors, what deserves the attention when preparing lawsuit materials? Today we would like to share the topic with readers as follows:

READ MORE

Could Apple Use Objection to Jurisdiction to Prolong the Litigation Period?

Posted on by

By Albert Chen

The most watched copyright battle between Chinese Writer Alliance (the “Alliance”) and Apple was heard in Beijing No.2 Intermediate People’s Court on the 11th of this month. You may have read our previous essay on the private hearing of the case, and in fact, Apple has also filed an objection to the jurisdiction in the case. Nonetheless, the application was refused by the intermediate court and upheld by the high court after appeal. The lawsuit has been delayed by procedure for nearly half a year, as favored by Apple. Today, we are going to introduce the regulation on the objection to civil jurisdiction in China.

READ MORE

Has Apple Lost Opportunity of In-Camera Hearing on Its Case?

Posted on by

By Albert Chen

The most watched dispute between Baidu (NASDAQ: BIDU) and Chinese Writers Alliance (the “Alliance”) is heard on 11th of October in Beijing No.2 Intermediate People’s Court. That lawsuit is filed following the battle against Baidu by the Alliance. Before the hearing on 11th, Apple applied to the court for the hearing in camera with the claim that the case is with trade secret related. After the consideration by the court, such an application was refused by the judge, yet it still decided the procedure may switch into be in private when one the interrogation involves the business secret. In today’s post, you may see our analysis on the “lawsuit in camera” in China.

READ MORE