Adidas'S Battle Of "Three Bars"

If this

Dispute between three bars

"This has a great impact on Chinese clothing brands." in September 28, 2011, Lin Congying, chairman of the Jinjiang textile and Garment Association and chairman of the nine Mu Wang, told reporters on the phone that otherwise, it was not only the three bars, but also the two bars and four bars could be infringed.

He is aiming at the "three bar" trademark registration final case.

Although it has passed for more than half a year, Lin Congying is in a very excited mood now.

It all started in 2002.

In September 13th of that year, Adidas applied for trademark registration with the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and commerce, specifying the use of twenty-fifth categories of clothing, coats, jackets, sportswear, pullovers, T-Shirts, windbreaker, down garments and gymnastic clothes.

"If the trademark is registered successfully, it means that Chinese clothing enterprises can not use three bars in the side of the garment."

Lin Congying said.

Therefore, the trademark (hereinafter referred to as the disputed trademark) was first examined and announced by the Trademark Office, and the Jinjiang textile and Garment Association applied for an objection to the trademark office.

But as a result, the Trademark Office has ruled No. 02320 in April 21, 2008: the trademark is approved for registration.

In May 12, 2008, the Jinjiang textile and Garment Association once again applied to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce for reexamination. It was said that the disputed trademark contained the general graphics of the designated commodity, which was not significant, and it was easy to cause confusion in the market. Adidas's malicious registration of monopolized market was an act of unfair competition prohibited by law.

Adidas replied to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board that the outline of the jacket is just for the better display of the position of the three bars, not a part of the trademark, and the three bar is its trademark.

Subsequently, in March 15, 2010, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board made decision No. 05798: its significance is on three vertical bars, and after a long period of use, it has established a corresponding relationship with Adidas, thus approving registration.

{page_break}

For this explanation, Jinjiang textile and Garment Association is hard to understand, so it was brought to Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's court.

In May 6, 2010, the court accepted the case and heard it publicly in September 15, 2010.

In court, Adidas reintroduced evidence.

For example: pictures of the seventeenth World Cup; highlights of the Golden Shoe trophy; photographs of the 2002 Asia Pacific finals of the Adidas Street Basketball Challenge; and even the list of countries and regions that Adidas companies were allowed to register in the 70s "three bar graphics".

The Jinjiang textile and Garment Association principal agent, Shanghai Zhi Ding law firm's former lawyer, and Su He Qin, partner of Feng Ze (Shanghai) law office, Kyushu, has defended and presented new evidence, such as proving the certificate of "three bars" used in plum blossom sportswear, the certificate issued by Tianjin knitted sports clothing factory, the product picture of the Chinese clothing enterprises using the "three bars" and "two bars", and the copy of the judgment of the Taipei higher administrative court.

In fact, the China clothing association also issued a certificate in June 24, 2010. The style design of a pole, two bars, three bars and five bars on the side of top sleeves and trousers is the clothing adornment commonly used by Chinese clothing enterprises, and it is a common pattern of sportswear in the Chinese market.

In the face of all kinds of evidence, the court finds that according to the law, the disputed trademark is a common flat trademark, not a three-dimensional trademark, and its use should reflect the entire trademark pattern.

At the same time, Adidas did not take the disputed trademark as a logo pattern, attached it to the market and did not advertise it, so it could not prove its significance after being used.

As for Adidas, the use of three bars is only a dress style or decoration, or involves other trademarks, and the appearance of some patterns in trademarks is not equivalent to the use of trademarks.

The court decided to remove the Trademark Review Board No. 05798 and reorder it.