Tag Archives: trademark

China Revised Its Law on Jurisdiction of Internet Infringement Involving Foreign Elements

Posted on by

 (By Albert Chen) On the issue of jurisdiction in online infringement cases, Article 1 of the Supreme People’s Court’s Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning Application of Law in Hearing Network Copyright Disputes Involving Computers (the “Network Dispute Interpretation”) previously stated that:

“Online copyright infringement dispute cases are within the jurisdiction of the court in the place where infringement occurred or the residence of the defendant. The place where infringement occurred includes the place where the network server or computer terminal used to conduct the accused infringement is located. For situations where it is difficult to determine the place where the infringement occurred or the residence of the defendant, the place where the computer terminal or other device that the plaintiff used to discover the infringement is located may be used as the place where the infringement occurred.”

READ MORE

Is OEM the Safe Harbor for Trademark Infringement in China?

Posted on by

(By Albert Chen) Whether original equipment manufacturing (OEM) can lead to trademark infringement has been long argued. The opinions on it may vary among the judicial organs in various regions and between the judicial department and various administrative departments. A Shanghai court once confirmed that a processing party should not assume infringement liability in the case Shenda vs. Jolida. Following this decision, some began to advocate the idea that OEMs could be considered a safe harbor in the seas of trademark infringement. Can that point of view reasonably be established in China? In today’s post, we would like to introduce you to Chinese cases and popular opinions in judicial circles concerning OEMs and trademark infringement.

READ MORE

Another iPad Like Battle for WeChat (微信) Trademark Dispute?

Posted on by
9090

 (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.

READ MORE

WeChat Trademark And Tencent’ s Problem in Trademark Management

Posted on by
u=1364176128,1836969918&fm=11&gp=0

(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.

READ MORE

All General Vocabulary Cannot Be Registered As Trademarks in China?

Posted on by
1101051007434

(By Luo Yanjie) Early in this year, JDB Inc., the famous herbal tea manufacturer argued with Guangzhou Pharmaceutical Company (the “GPC”) regarding ownership of the Wang Lao Ji trademark, which concluded in JDB being ordered to cease its use of the trademark. Now, JDB has begun its second battle with GPC, this time accusing GPC of infringeing the trademark “Ji Qing Shi Fen (吉庆时分).” Wanglaoji Health Industry Co. Ltd. (Guangzhou Wanglaoji Company) affiliated with GPC, recently made a statement that the State Trademark Office had accepted its application to revoke the registration of “Ji Qing Shi Fen (吉庆时分)”, the main reason being that the mark is considered generic in the sense that it is vocabulary in common use. Due to this, the State Trademark Office further advocated that it is uncertain whether there can be any exclusive right in the use of the registered mark.

READ MORE

Why Nippon Lost Its Lawsuit against Trademark Infringement by Taobao Sellers?

Posted on by
u=2281873618,2747446169&fm=23&gp=0_副本

(By Luo Yanjie)In March 2011 the globally well-known paint producer Nippon Paint Co. Ltd. (“Nippon”), discovered Zhanjin Company had set up a shop on Taobao.com, the biggest online market in China, and had been using Nippon trademarks, ads and trade dress concerning Nippon products with no approval or license from it. With no reply from Taobao.com after filing a complaint, Nippon sued Zhanjin and Taobao in court, and yet the complaint was rejected by the judge. Dissatisfied with this result, Nippon made an appeal to the Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People’s Court, who ruled that the adoption of Nippon’s trademark by Zhanjin is for product information display only, and it could lead to no likelihood of confusion among the public. In addition, the court ruled that no commercial interests of the plaintiff would be damaged. Based on these rulings, the alleged trademark infringement claim could not be established, and therefore the original decision was maintained.

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

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

How to Legally Use Mickey Mouse Brand and FIgure in China?

By You Yunting

About one month before, the IPR Committee of Shanghai Bar Association invited the police officer from the Economic Investigating Squadron of Shanghai Police Department to deliver a speech on the criminal protection over IPR issues. And in the communication after the seminar, the police officer raised a question to the acceded lawyers, “The Shanghai Disney Land will be constructed several years later, and it’s foreseeable that there could be stores selling Mickey Mouse or other figures articles with no license thereby granted around the park. Yet, by then, the copyright protection term on Mickey could be expired, and so what measures could be taken to strike the unlicensed using or selling?”

READ MORE

Why Shenzhen Proview Will Not Be Bankrupt Immediately?

Posted on by

According to the report from the Beijing News (note: the link is in Chinese), Shenzhen Proview, the company battling against Apple in the iPad trademark dispute has been applied for bankruptcy clearance by its debtor Taiwan Fubon Insurance (Fubon), who first applied for the bankruptcy to Shenzhen Intermediate Court in June of 2011 and sent the written notice to urge the acceptation on 20th February, 2012.

According to the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law, “where an enterprise legal person fails to pay off its debts, and that if its assets are not enough to pay off all the debts or if it is obviously incapable of paying off its debts, its debts shall be liquidated in accordance with the provisions of the present Law.” That is to say the bankruptcy could only be applicable when the company’s assets are not enough to pay off its debts or it’s obviously incapable to pay off its debts. In the case, it’s arguable to say Shenzhen Proview is under such situations. For one hand, Fubon claims Shenzhen Proview has not made the payment on its debt and seems to be incapable to make the payment, while on the other hand, Shenzhen Proview disclaimed the accusation and insisted the iPad trademark is valuable enough to clear all the debt once it could be realized, and therefore it shall not be liquidated under the bankruptcy procedure.

READ MORE

How to Apply for the Trademark Record in China Custom

Highlight: You could get to know the effective way of combating infringing product by trademark record in China custom in today’s post.

As reported by xinhuanet.com, the first instance of the knockoff brand product case with the biggest amount involved in recent was heard. The suspect of the case purchased the knockoff LV, Adidas, LACOSTE and other brand products for export, afterwards the knockoffs were detained for the suspicious infringement basing on the recorded trademark by the customhouse after the inspection, and finally the products were appraised fake with the market value of more than 230 million yuan.

READ MORE

Will Daily Deal Website Lashou Lost its domain name for trademark infringement?

Highlight: Lashou.com. a well-known daily deal website in China, says that the trademark of “拉手(Chinese pronunciation: lashou)”and“拉手团购(Chinese pronunciation: lashou tuangou)”have not be registered. For this, Bridge IPR Commentary made the retrieval and also put forward our advice.

It’s reported that Lashou.com is not approved for it’s application of the trademark “拉手”and“拉手团购”for their similarity to the registered ones, thus may bring Lashou.com the trademark conflict and the risk of losing its domain name www.lashou.com. If the reported facts do exist, the market of Lashou.com and its operating company Beijing Lashou Internet Technology Co., Ltd (hereinafter called as “Lashou Company”) may be influenced hereby, and even its IPO could be delayed.

READ MORE

The Introduction on the Chinese Laws and Regulations concerning the Withholding Tax

Highlight: to introduce you the regulations concerning the withholding tax in China, including the scope and the calculation base of the tax.

Recently a reader consult our website for the relevant legal problems regarding the withholding tax in China. The withholding tax is a usually encountered question in foreign exchange payment for those foreign companies having cooperation with Chinese enterprises in intellectual property right. Ms. Chen Danhong, the attorney of our website replied the question as follows:

READ MORE