Jordan'S Sports Listing Raises Trademark Criticism

At the beginning of the year, the Chinese mainland

The essence of Mengniu incident is nothing more than the problem of product quality and safety. Compared with Mengniu, the topic triggered by Jordan sports is more worthwhile.

There are mainly two kinds of voices surrounding these disputes: first, China is now at a stage of fierce competition in the market. Jordan and crayon small new brands have become the typical cases of making their products stand out by skillfully borrowing the names of others. The second rule is that Jordan has a pure Chinese lineage, and its existence is perfectly legal. It is much earlier than that of Nike (Nike)'s Jordan (Air Jordan) brand.

Looking at the history of Jordan's sports business development, and linking with the development process of Chinese local brands for many years, the two statements triggered by Jordan seem to be reasonable.

Jordan sports predecessor was founded in 1984 in Jinjiang city chedai Creek daily necessities two factory, in 2000, daily necessities two factory officially changed its name to Jordan sports through legitimate industrial and commercial channels, from then on Jordan sports entered a steady growth stage.

By the end of 2011, Jordan sports was ranked among the top ten sportswear enterprises in China through good business performance and successfully passed the IPO qualification examination of the SFC.

Indeed, as an important market competing by global brand giants, China's intellectual property protection system still needs to be improved.

If Jordan's sports and Air Jordan shoes and clothing series used in China coincide with the trademark name is a side ball action, Nike will try every means to prevent such behavior.

In fact, Nike had filed a complaint about trademark infringement against Jordan sports, but the Trademark Office rejected it. After that, Nike did not make any administrative proceedings.

Even in accordance with the laws of western countries, the situation of Jordan sports is legitimate.

The warning is a trademark lawsuit against Jordan 23 (Jumpman23), and Nike also ended in defeat.

Seeing the end of the year, Jordan sports approved the upcoming landing of A shares is a great joy for local brands.

It is a normal phenomenon that the trademark is not mentioned in the bill, which is a normal phenomenon, because there are too many "old debts reclaiming", "rumors attacking" and "anonymous reporting" on the eve of the company's listing.