Ten Typical Cases of Trademark Administrative Protection for 2020 Released by China

From the top ten typical cases of trademark administrative protection in 2020, we can see that for new infringements modes, such as infringements using internet self-media platforms, the market supervision and management department has the courage to break through the case handling mode and effectively safeguard the rights and interests of the right holders; market supervision and management departments pay more attention to the protection of well-known Chinese and foreign trademarks; in addition, market supervision and management departments have strengthened cooperation with other departments such as public security, procuratorates and other agencies, and severely cracked down on serious infringements. The following

is a brief introduction and comments on these cases:

1. Anhui Ma’anshan Market Supervision and Administration Bureau investigated and dealt with cases of infringement on exclusive rights of registered trademarks such as “Feng Che in Chinese” (??)

Case Introduction

The trademark No. 753230 “Feng Che in Chinese” (??), No. 639160 “ Device”, and the trademark No. 1239101 “Device”, are registered trademarks of MEELUNIE B.V. on edible potato flour, cornflour, and other commodities, and the exclusive rights will respectively expire until 27 June 2025, 27 April 2023, and 13 January 2029.
On 10 June 2019, Ma’anshan Market Supervision and Administration Bureau investigated Ma’anshan Shangjia Food Co., Ltd. (Shangjia Company) according to the complaint. After investigation, Shangjia Company was found that it involved in the production of “Feng Che in Chinese” (??) brand corn flour since September 2018. The trademark used by Shangjia Company is similar to the registered trademark owned by MEELUNIE B.V.. On 7 August 2019, Ma’anshan Market Supervision and Administration Bureau determined that the Shangjia Company used a trademark similar to the registered trademark owned by MEELUNIE B.V. in relation to the same good, which is likely to cause confusion and constitute the infringement behavior provided under Paragraph 2, Article 57 of the Trademark Law. The Ma’anshan Market Supervision and Administration Bureau decided that the infringement shall be stopped immediately in accordance with the Paragraph 2, Article 60 of the Trademark Law. Related infringing goods and unused packaging mainly used to manufacture infringing goods shall be confiscated, and Shangjia Company shall be fined an administrative penalty of RMB 1.5040 million. Shangjia Company refused to accept the administrative penalty decision and filed administrative reconsideration and administrative litigation successively. The Ma’anshan Municipal People’s Government and the Ma’anshan Yushan People’s Court maintained the administrative penalty decision. On 28 October 2020, Ma’anshan Intermediate People’s court final judgment rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment. On 30 December 2020, the Anhui Higher People’s Court rejected Shangjia Company’s request for a retrial.

Short Reviews

The goods involved in the case were food, and the investigation and decision effectively prevented the infringing food from flowing into the market and safeguarded the people’s safety. The law enforcement department’s determination is accurate, and the judgment for a similar trademark in the decision is a reference for a similar case. The case went through administrative reconsideration and administrative litigation, and the judicial organs finally supported the decision on administrative punishment. The case gives a positive significance for creating a good business environment and enhancing the investment confidence of foreign-funded enterprises in China.

2. Shanghai Pudong Intellectual Property Office investigated and dealt with the case of infringement on the exclusive right of “BORDEAUX” geographical indication trademark

Case Introduction

The trademark “BORDEAUX” No. 19564618 is a collective geographical indication trademark registered by the Conseil Interprofessionnel Du Vin De Bordeaux (Bordeaux) about wine products. The exclusive right period is until 20 July 2027. On 25 April 2019, Shanghai Pudong Intellectual Property Office received a clue from the Chengdu Municipal Market Supervision Administration: Shanghai Feitong Trading Co., Ltd. (Feitong) exhibited suspected infringing “BORDEAUX” wine at the National Sugar and Liquor Trade Fair. After investigation, since July 2018, Feitong entrusted Yantai Aowei Yiman Wine Co., Ltd. (Aowei Yiman) to process and produce “BURKE LAFAEL” series wines, Feitong provided bottles, caps, labels, inner and outer boxes, and other materials. Feitong entrusted Shenzhen David Gospel Packaging Design and Printing Co., Ltd. to design and produce the bottle label and then handed it over to Aowei Yiman to use on the bottle. Feitong used the “BORDEAUX” labels on the wine bottles without authorization, and the illegal business amount was RMB 385,900. The law enforcement department believes that Feitong’s acts of producing and selling the above-mentioned infringing goods constitute infringements as stipulated in Paragraph 1, Article 57 of the Trademark Law. Due to the many goods involved and the high value, Feitong’s behavior has reached the standards for criminal prosecution. On 4 June 2020, Shanghai Pudong People’s Court issued a criminal judgment by the law and sentenced Feitong to the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks and a fine of RMB 100,000; Defendant Zhuge, the actual operator of Feitong commits the crime of counterfeiting a registered trademark and was sentenced to one year and six months imprisonment, probation for one year and six months, and a fine of RMB 50,000; The seized wines with counterfeiting registered trademarks shall be confiscated; the Defendant Zhuge is prohibited from engaging in food production, sales, and related activities during the probation period.

Short Reviews

Geographical indications are the precious resources and wealth of a specific area. The production and sale of goods with counterfeit geographical indications will seriously damage the reputation of geographical indications and severely infringe on producers and operators' legal rights and interests in specific regions, such as the competitive advantage. The investigation and handling of this case confirmed that the geographical indication is the infringement object of the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks. Which reflects China’s “same protection” for geographical indication trademarks at home and abroad and reflects the effective operation of the cross-regional cooperation mechanism of trademark administrative enforcement in China and the practical connection between trademark administrative enforcement and criminal justice.

3. The Jiangsu Zhangjiagang Free Trade Zone Market Supervision and Administration Bureau investigated and dealt with the case of infringement on the exclusive rights of registered trademarks such as “EagleBurgmann”, “GRUNDFOS”, and “???”

Case Introduction

Trademark No. G913774 “EagleBurgmann” is owned by EAGLEBURGMANN GERMANY GMBH&CO.KG (EagleBurgmann) on machinery parts, pumps, compressor seals, and other commodities, with the exclusive right until 25 August 2026; Trademark No. 13760797 “GRUNDFOS” is owned by Grundfos Holding A/S (Grundfos) on pumps (machines, engines, or motor parts) and other commodities, the exclusive right period is until 20 August 2025; Trademark No. 7652880 “???” is owned by Grundfos Pumps (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (Grundfos Shanghai) on bearings (machine parts) and mechanical seals, the exclusive right period is until 20 October 2025.

On 9 June 2020, according to the complaint of the right holder, Zhangjiagang Bonded area Market Supervision and Administration Bureau, together with the public security department, conducted surprise inspections on 13 mechanical seal manufacturers and sales companies in the jurisdiction. The related department found more than 200 “EagleBurgmann”, “GRUNDFOS”, “???” various types of seal products, 1,000 packaging boxes, 30,000 forged labels, and certificates, as well as five sets of Laser marking machine for counterfeiting registered trademarks, 20 computers, and the amount involved more than RMB 659 million. Subsequently, the law enforcement officers went to Haikou, Changsha, Yueyang, and other places based on the transaction clues found to investigate and collect evidence on the enterprises involved. It successfully destroyed several counterfeit production and sales dens.

The law enforcement department determined that these companies involved constituted an infringement under Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, and Paragraph 3, Article 57 of the Trademark Law, and confiscated and destroyed the infringing goods under Paragraph 2, Article 60 of the Trademark Law, a total fine of RMB 10.3492 million were imposed on the companies, and seven people in 6 companies suspected of committing crimes were transferred to the public security organs by the law. After the case was completed, the German Consulate General and the Danish Consulate General in Shanghai sent thanks.

Short Reviews

The case involved the entire chain of production, processing, and sales of infringing goods. The law enforcement agencies have expanded from investigations of individual cases to full investigations in the same industry within their jurisdictions and expanded to a joint attack by multiple provinces across China, and finally successfully eliminated the manufacture and sale of counterfeit products. The administrative law enforcement agencies closely collaborate with public security agencies, which fully demonstrates the advantages of administrative protection.

4. The Fujian Quanzhou Municipal Market Supervision Administration investigated and dealt with the case of infringement on the exclusive right to use the registered trademark “FILA”

Case Introduction

Trademark No. 163333 “FILA” is a registered trademark owned by Manjing (IP) Co., Ltd. (Manjing) on clothing, shoes, socks, and other goods. After renewal, the exclusive right period will expire to 14 October 2022. On 24 July 2019, law enforcement officers of the Fujian Quanzhou Municipal Market Supervision and Administration Bureau investigated Han Shi Xuan Clothing Trading Co., Ltd. (Han Shi Xuan) and seized 13.92 million sets of clothing marked with “EILA” logo in the warehouse. After investigation, the law enforcement department found that Han Shi Xuan has been selling products marked with the “EILA” logo through Tmall stores since March 2019. The illegal business volume of the clothing totaled RMB 7,738,500. Han Shi Xuan claimed that the clothing involved was purchased from Shishi Aoerqi Clothing Co., Ltd. (Aoerqi) and other shops, but law enforcement officers verified that Aoerqi had been cancelled on 25 March 2019, and no shops were found. At the same time, the trademark application for the logo “EILA” was rejected by the Trademark Office on 31 October 2019 because the logo “EILA” and Trademark No. 163333 “FILA” are similar in relation to similar products. In investigating the case, Manjing separately filed a civil lawsuit for trademark infringement, and then Han Shi Xuan reached a settlement agreement with Manjing.

On 16 September 2020, the Quanzhou Municipal Market Supervision and Administration Bureau determined that the trademark involved “EILA” is similar with the registered trademark “FILA”, which could easily lead to confusion. Han Shi Xuan’ actions constituted infringements as stipulated in Paragraph 3, Article 57 of the Trademark Law. Considering that Han Shi Xuan violated the law for the first time, actively cooperated with the investigation, and reached a mediation agreement with the Manjing, the Bureau imposed an administrative penalty of 1 RMB million on it. Later, Han Shi Xuan applied to the Quanzhou Municipal People’s Government for administrative reconsideration. On 15 December 2020, the reconsideration agency maintained the administrative penalty decision.

Short Reviews

In this case, although Han Shi Xuan and Manjing reached a settlement agreement at the stage of judicial litigation, Han Shi Xuan still cannot be exempted from administrative responsibility. When making penalties, the administrative agency comprehensively considered Han Shi Xuan’s illegal circumstances and imposed corresponding administrative penalties. It is the principle of excessive penalties in the administrative protection of trademarks.

5. Changchun Jilin Market Supervision and Administration Bureau investigated and handled the case of infringement on the exclusive right of the registered trademark of “Harbin Medicine in Chinese” (“??”)

Case Introduction

Trademark No. 10484474, No. 14419610, No. 3126576 “Harbin Medicine in Chinese” (“??”) are owned by Harbin Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd. (Harbin Pharmaceutical Group) on products such as tonics, human medicines, ointments, Chinese medicines, vitamin preparations, tonics, medicinal royal jelly, and other products, raw materials, powder injections, and other products, and the exclusive rights will respectively expire until 27 May 2023, 6 July 2025, and 13 June 2023.

On 24 October 2019, Jilin Changchun Market Supervision Administration inspected the warehouse leased by Changchun Pharmaceutical Distribution Co., Ltd.(Changchun Pharmaceutical Distribution), and found many suspected infringing drugs. After investigation, on 26 April 2018, the TRAB decided that the trademark “Ha Zong in Chinese” (??) was invalid because it was constituted similarity with “Harbin Medicine in Chinese” (“??”) . The legal representative of Jilin Hazong Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd., the former trademark applicant of the trademark “Ha Zong in Chinese” (??), informed the salesperson about the matter orally. Changchun Pharmaceutical Distribution, knowing that the trademark “Ha Zong in Chinese” (??) has been ruled invalid, still purchased a total of 389.44 million boxes of drugs marked with the word trademark “Ha Zong in Chinese” (??) from Jilin Yihong Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and other companies in April and May 2019. As of the time of the case, Changchun Pharmaceutical Distribution had sold 170,34 thousand boxes. The sales amount was RMB 683,800, and the remaining 219,100 boxes were unsold.

On 16 March 2020, the case-handling agency determined that Changchun Pharmaceutical Distribution’s behavior constituted the infringements stipulated in Paragraph 3, Article 57 of the Trademark Law, following Paragraph 2, Article 60 of the Trademark Law, Changchun Pharmaceutical Distribution was ordered to stop the infringement immediately. The infringing goods were confiscated, and a fine of RMB 500,000 was imposed. The illegal activities of Jilin Yihong Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and other enterprises shall be dealt with separately.

Short Reviews

Trademark similarity judgments are one of the keys to determining infringements in trademark infringement cases. Changchun Pharmaceutical Distribution knows that the trademark “Harbin Medicine in Chinese” (“??”) is a well-known trademark. It still buys and sells drugs that use the brand “Ha Zong in Chinese” (??) that is similar to “Harbin Medicine in Chinese” (“??”), which may easily cause consumers to confuse or misidentify the source of the goods. Consumers will easily believe that its origin has a specific connection with “Harbin Medicine in Chinese” (“??”). The case handling agency conducted investigations promptly and applied laws accurately, effectively safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of trademark registrants and the drug safety of consumers.

6. Zhejiang Hangzhou Municipal Market Supervision and Administration Bureau investigated and dealt with cases of infringement on the exclusive rights of registered trademarks such as “Device”

Case Introduction

Trademark No. 839916 “ Device” is owned by Zhejiang Radio and Television Group for radio broadcasting, news agency, TV broadcasting, and other services. After renewal, the exclusive right will expire until 13 May 2026. The trademark No. 7010742 “Device” is owned by Zhejiang Radio and Television Group in arranging and organizing conferences, radio and television, program production, and radio entertainment programs. The exclusive right will expire until 20 January 2022.

On 22 November 2019, Hangzhou Municipal Market Supervision and Administration Bureau received a report. The informant said that Hangzhou Jingxi Network Technology Co., Ltd. (Jingxi Company) used the name “Zhejiang Satellite TV” and “Device” logo recorded the interview video of the on-site promotion meeting and publicized it on the company’s official website, WeChat, Weibo and other platforms, suspected of infringement. After investigation, Jingxi Company to promoted the APP, entrusted Hangzhou Duoyifen Cultural and Creative Co., Ltd. (Duoyi Company) to undertake the new product promotion conference, “Zhejiang Satellite TV” was invited on-site for interviews. Because the activities organized by Jingxi Company did not meet the interview requirements of “Zhejiang Satellite TV”, Duoyi Company used the microphone marked with “Device” Logo by the needs of Jingxi Company. Duoyi Company provided the interview video, which is marked with “Device” logo, “Device” logo and “Zhejiang Satellite TV” to Jingxi Company. Jingxi Company knew that the interview videos which marked with “Device” logo, “Device” logo and “Zhejiang Satellite TV” is not authorized and still publicized in the form of video, text, and pictures through the company’s official website, social network, service account, short video, and so on.

On 7 July 2020, Hangzhou Municipal Market Supervision and Administration confirmed the actions of Jingxi Company and Duoyi Company constituted infringements as stipulated in Paragraphs 1 and 2, Article 57 of the Trademark Law. According to Paragraph 2, Article 60 of the Trademark Law, Jingxi Company and Duoyi Company are ordered to stop the infringement immediately and respectively fined an administrative penalty of RMB 20,000 and RMB 20,000.

Short Reviews

This case infringes on the exclusive right of service trademarks by using various internet self-media platforms. In this case, Jingxi Company and Duoyi Company broke through the category of traditional carriers (good packaging or containers and commodity transaction documents), using the trademarks on current popular internet self-media platform for advertising and other commercial activities. The infringement forms are diverse, rapid, concealed, harmful, and significant, and it is also challenging to obtain evidence. Law enforcement officers timely fixed the evidence involved in the case and accurately identified trademark use behaviors, effectively deterring the use of internet self-media platforms to infringe on exclusive trademark rights.

7. The Guangdong Guangzhou Municipal Market Supervision and Administration Bureau investigated and dealt with the case of infringement of the exclusive right on use the “Device” registered trademark

Case Introduction

On 11 October 2018, McGee Co., Ltd.( McGee) in Taiwan which sold cups, bowls, drinking straws, and other products, tea beverages, smoothies, fruit ice, and other products, non-alcoholic carbonated beverages, milk tea (non-dairy based), tea flavors, and so on for non-alcoholic beverages, and other goods, teahouses, bar services, mobile catering services, and other services, applied to the Trademark Office for registration No. 33962075, No. 33962074, No. 33962073, No. 33962071 “Device” trademark on 28 June 2019. Registrations were approved on 28 June 2019, and the exclusive right period will expire until 27 June 2029. McGee signed a trademark exclusive license contract with Shanghai Maji Catering Management Co., Ltd. (Shanghai Maji Company), authorizing it to use the above four trademarks. The license period is until 27 June 2029.

In December 2019, the Guangzhou Municipal Market Supervision and Administration Bureau received a report from Shanghai Maji Company that many companies infringed on the exclusive right to use the registered trademark “Device”. After investigation, Guangzhou Xinbo Catering Management Service Co., Ltd. (Xinbo), Tea Control Enterprise Management (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. (Tea Control), Maji (Guangzhou) Catering Brand Management Co., Ltd. (Maji Guangzhou) were found to use the logos “Device”, “Device”, and “Device” on tableware and store decoration related to milk tea are similar with McGee’s registered trademark. These three companies either open directly operated stores, recruit franchisees by charging franchise fees and open milk tea shops across China to make huge profits.

The case handling agency determined that these three companies constituted an infringement under Paragraph 2, Article 57 of the Trademark Law. In August 2020, the Guangzhou Municipal Market Supervision Administration ordered the parties involved in the case to stop the infringement, confiscated the infringing items and tools, and imposed a fine of more than RMB 5.52 million by Paragraph 2, Article 60 of the Trademark Law.

Short Reviews

In recent years, the cases of trademark infringement by attracting franchisees and distributors have been increasing. Some infringers use seemingly legal logos or packaging on beverages, snacks, cosmetics, and other commodities that are not the same as others’ registered and well-known trademarks and promote them through the internet to mislead consumers. This mode of infringement has strong concealment and can be seen everywhere in physical stores. Still, the source is difficult to find and frequently occurs across regions, and subjective maliciousness is obvious. Among the listed cases, law enforcement agencies cooperated, actively investigated, and collected evidence, and extracted vital evidence such as franchise service fee transfer records from the client’s cooperation client, laying a solid foundation for the investigation and handling of the case, and achieved good results.

8. Beijing Chaoyang District Market Supervision and Administration Bureau investigated and dealt with the case of infringement on the exclusive right to use the “3M” registered trademark

Case Introduction

Trademark No. 6246533 “3M” is a registered trademark of 3M Company in the United States on respirators, safety masks, protective masks, and other products other than artificial respiration. After renewal, the exclusive right will expire on 27 April 2030.

On 26 January 2020, the Beijing Chaoyang District Market Supervision Administration received public opinion monitoring information, reflecting that the “3M” mask sold by Kangbaixin Pharmacy was suspected of counterfeiting registered trademarks. The actual operating entity of the store is the First Branch of Beijing Kangbaixin Haoyisheng Pharmacy Co., Ltd. (Kangbaixin). Based on preliminary investigations and inquiries, the Law Enforcement Corps of the Beijing Municipal Market Supervision Administration coordinated the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau investigation. They arrested Li, the person in charge of the company. According to his confession, a total of 21,135 counterfeiting 3M masks were obtained. Recognized by 3M company, it is a counterfeit product.

The case-handling agency determined that Kangbaixin’s conduct constituted the infringement under Paragraph 3, Article 57 Trademark Law, and the calculable illegal business amount is RMB 291,600, committed a crime. The Chaoyang District Market Supervision and Administration Bureau transferred the case to the public security organs under the law. On 19 June 2020, the Chaoyang District People’s Court made the first instance. Li was sentenced to 15 years in prison for the crime of producing and selling fake and inferior goods and imposed a fine of RMB 4 million; more than RMB 3.3 million of illegal income was withheld. The Li and two other people involved in the case refused to accept the judgment of the first instance and appealed to Beijing No. 3 Middle People’s Court. On 21 August 2020, the Court ruled, dismissing the appeal and upholding the original judgment.

Short Reviews

In the epidemic period in 2020, the market supervision department has made remarkable achievements in effectively stopping the price of anti-epidemic materials and promptly investigating and punishing counterfeit and inferior anti-epidemic materials. The case handling agency, in this case, has conducted a thorough investigation in the early stage, accurately defined the actors, and efficiently identified the facts involved. At the same time, it actively cooperated with the public security, procuratorate, and other agencies to provide for the sale of counterfeit masks and other epidemic prevention materials that have serious violations, serious damage consequences, and harmful social impacts. Severely cracked down and transferred clues to the crime involved in the case, which played an excellent demonstration effect and deterrent effect.

9. The Shanghai Municipal Administration of Market Supervision investigated and handled the illegal application for registration of the “Device” trademark

Case Introduction

Wuhan Huoshenshan Hospital was established on 27 January 2020, with a unified social credit code of 12420100MB1B8439XP. The Shanghai Municipal Market Supervision and Administration Bureau initiated investigations into illegal acts in its jurisdiction, based on the notice of the Trademark Office on the rejection of “Huoshenshan in Chinese”(???) and other epidemic-related trademarks and the clues to the case. After investigation, on 18 February 2020, Shanghai Diqi New Material Technology Co., Ltd. (Diqi) entrusted Shanghai Jiacheng Trademark Agency Co., Ltd. (Jiacheng) to apply for the registration for two trademarks “Device”, the application numbers are No. 44122152 and No. 44118486 respectively. On 22 April 2020, by the opinions approved by the Trademark Office and combined with the specific circumstances of the case, the Shanghai Municipal Market Supervision Administration determined that the Diqi’s application for registration of the two trademarks mentioned above was adverse behavior described under Paragraph 8, Article 10 of the Trademark Law, Paragraph 6, Article 3 of the Regulations on the Regulation of Trademark Application and Registration Acts, and was the acts that damage the prior rights of others under Article 32 of the Trademark Law and Paragraph 4, Article 3 of the Regulations on the Regulation of Trademark Application and Registration Activities. According to Paragraph 4, Article 68 of the Trademark Law and Article 12 of the Regulations on Regulating Trademark Registration Acts, the case-handling agency imposed an administrative penalty of RMB 10,000 Diqi. At the same time, the IP agency and the person in charge were warned and fined RMB 80,000 and an administrative penalty of RMB 5000.

Short Reviews

“Some people are saving lives, but others are rushing to register trademarks”. During the epidemic, individual applicants rushed to register “Huoshenshan in Chinese”(???) and “Leishenshan in Chinese” (???) and other trademarks related to the epidemic, which caused widespread concern and produced adverse social effects. By the guidance of the Trademark Office, the case-handling agency responded quickly, accurately qualitatively, and severely investigated and dealt with illegal applicants, agencies, and their responsible persons. The investigation and handling of this case reflect the law enforcement efforts of the trademark law enforcement agencies during the anti-epidemic period, and also allows all sectors of the society to have a better understanding of the illegality and harmfulness of maliciously registered trademarks, which has a strong deterrent effect and has made a response to the fight against the epidemic.

10. Zhejiang Huzhou Market Supervision and Administration Bureau investigated and handled the case of infringement on the well-known trademark “Yongyi in Chinese” (??)

Case Introduction

Trademark No. 15340604 “Yongyi in Chinese” (??) is owned by Yongyi Furniture Co., Ltd. (Yongyi Company) on furniture, seats, chairs (seats), and other commodities, and the exclusive right period is until 28 October 2025.

On 24 April 2020, Yongyi Company complained to the Huzhou Market Supervision and Administration Bureau that Anji Shengfeng Furniture Fittings Factory (Shengfeng Furniture) used and registered “Yongyi in Chinese” (??) on the seat springs, which is the same as the trademark “Yongyi in Chinese” (??) owned by Yongyi Company and misled the public and harms the interests of Yongyi Company. Yongyi Company requests the protection of a well-known trademark and prohibits the use. Huzhou Market Supervision Administration initiated an investigation on 28 April and found that Shengfeng Furniture had a total of 240 boxes of 19,200 seat springs marked with the “Yongyi in Chinese” (??) trademark, as of the case, a total of 210 boxes of 16,800 seat springs have been sold, with a total sales of RMB 3.7 million, there are 30 boxes of 2,400 left in stock. After preliminary verification and review, Huzhou Market Supervision Administration believes that although the seat springs and the products designated in the Trademark No. 15340604 “Yongyi in Chinese” (??) are not similar products, the seat springs, as parts of the seat, has a high degree of overlap with the products under Trademark No. 15340604 “Yongyi in Chinese” (??) in terms of producers, sellers, consumers, and so on. Besides, the trademark “Yongyi in Chinese” (??) is well-known to the relevant public. Shengfeng Furniture’s behavior is easy to mislead the public and damage the interests of Yongyi Company. The case complies with the provisions of Paragraph 3, Article 13 of the Trademark Law. According to Article 11 of the Regulations on the Recognition and Protection of Well-Known Trademarks, Yongyi Company submitted the well-known trademark identification request and a copy of the case materials to the Zhejiang Intellectual Property Office. After verification and examination, Zhejiang Intellectual Property Office found that the trademark “Yongyi in Chinese” (??) complied with the regulations. It was reported to the Trademark Office for recognition of well-known trademarks by Article 12 of the Regulations on the Recognition and Protection of Well-Known Trademarks. On 5 August, the Trademark Office approved and recognized the trademark “Yongyi in Chinese” (??) used on the goods such as chairs (seats), seats, and furniture products in Class 20 as a well-known trademark. On 30 August, under Article 72 of the Regulations for the Implementation of the Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China, Huzhou Market Supervision Administration ordered the Shengfeng Furniture to stop using the seat springs, and confiscated and destroyed the cartons marked with “Yongyi in Chinese” (??) trademark.

Short Reviews

The revised Trademark Law in 2001 expanded the protection of well-known trademarks, and the revised Trademark Law in 2013 further improved the regulations on the identification and protection of well-known trademarks. In 2019, the Trademark Office issued a particular document to strengthen the protection of well-known trademarks, expressly requiring local bureaus to protect well-known trademarks promptly and give the well-known trademark invoking protection and critical protection. The “Yongyi Trademark Case” is a typical case of timely protection for a well-known trademark. The well-known trademarks were protected in a timely and effective manner, and good law enforcement effects and social responsibility were obtained.

---

---

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Sarah Xuan
SArah Xuan is a Partner in the MMLC Group.

Copyright MMLC Group



Disclaimer: Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication at the time it was written. It is not intended to provide legal advice or suggest a guaranteed outcome as individual situations will differ and the law may have changed since publication. Readers considering legal action should consult with an experienced lawyer to understand current laws and.how they may affect a case. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.