Shanshan Stock Rights Protection "Shanshan Fir" Is Still Being Snatch!

In November 12th,

Issue of shares (600884, SH)

The announcement did not cause much concern.

The announcement shows that Shanshan stock has made timely progress to the China Textile Industry Federation and China.

The association carried out a report.

China Apparel Association and China Textile Industry Federation wrote to the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce and the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board in March and October of 2015 respectively.

In November 21st, it was learned that the final result of the above trademark matters did not come out.

On the afternoon of that afternoon, Wang Xuezheng, head of the statute Department of the former State Administration for Industry and commerce, and leader of the drafting group of the anti unfair competition law, told reporters that they supported the application of Shanshan Group for the invalidation of the controversial trademark.

He believes that trademark registration is still chaotic, not a reasonable prosperity, which also brings more burden to enterprises.

In the morning of November 23rd, reporters searched in various directions and contacted Qian Xueli, the trademark owner of the "Shanshan fir", asking about its trademark and affiliate and so on. However, he declined the interview with "no need".

Disputes about trademark identification standards

In November 21st, at the argumentation Conference on the trademark of Shan Shan, sponsored by the intellectual property research center and the trade secret network, the professors from several universities of political science and law and the National Intellectual Property Research Center believed that there had been "contradictions" in the relevant departments' registration of "Shanshan fir".

According to public information, "fir fir" applicants for Xu Zhiqiang.

In July 2011, the applicant applied for the trademark, and the first notice was May 2012.

In the following August 2012, for the registration of "Shanshan fir" trademark, Shanshan shares filed a trademark objection to the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and commerce.

However, by August 16, 2013, the Trademark Office ruled that "Shan Shan Fei Lai" was approved for registration.

In August 2013, Shanshan stock also raised a trademark objection review.

However, at the end of 2014, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board concluded that the conclusion was still approved by the trademark "Shan Shan Fei Lai".

The reason given is that there is a difference between the disputed trademark and the quoted trademark "Shanshan" in terms of word composition, call, meaning and so on.

Two coexistence of trademarks is not easy to cause confusion among the relevant public about the source of goods.

According to the insiders, the registered trademark of "Shan Shan Fei Lai" is the addition of "Shan Shan" well-known trademark and its parent company's "Fei Lai" trademark. Its situation is not significantly different from the trademarks it has not been given. As the main recognition part of the domestic consumers, the famous trademarks of "Shanshan" and "Chinese Fir" are similar in terms of words and calls, and are indeed misleading consumers.

Therefore, the application registration of "Shanshan fir" trademark has constituted the thirtieth provision of the existing trademark law, and it should declare that the registered trademark is invalid.

Against this background, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board has become the focus of attention in the field of objection and objection review.

A trademark expert who does not want to be named told reporters that the outcome of a case will be affected in many ways. The analogy between different trademarks is of some significance, but the meaning is not decisive, and this kind of comparison does not have much reference value.

"Whether the case can win is not the facts, but the evidence. Whether the evidence submitted is able to support your proposition. This is the key."

"This is not necessarily a question of rules, but also a basic understanding of facts by different organizations.

The present result is contradictory in law, which directly affects the legal work of the market, enterprises and related organs. "

Wang Xuezheng pointed out this.

Experts recommend Shanshan Group to sue

After the approval of the trademark of "Shan Shan Fei Lai" in 2015 4, in June of this year, the Shanshan Group applied to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board for an application for the invalidation of the trademark of Shanshan fir.

Considering that the trademark is approved and will carry out specific business, this month, it issued a trademark rights protection statement.

It is worth mentioning that although Shanshan Group Limited was awarded the trademark "Fei Lai" in May 28, 2008 (registration certificate number 3413242, international classification number is twenty-fifth categories), and in April 28th of 2005, it was awarded the "brand" trademark (registration number 3505142, twenty-fifth international classification number), and authorized the use of Shanshan stock.

However, the application for objection and objection reexamination made by Shan Shan did not express too much.

However, in the latest application for trademark invalidation of "Shan Shan Fei Lai", both "Fei Lai" and "Fei Lai Wei" have become the citation marks.

Sun Jiaen, the founder of the trade secret network and the arbitrator of the Ningbo Arbitration Commission, said that at present, from the open content of the website of the Trademark Bureau, we can see that the registered trademark of "Shan Shan Fei Lai" has been pferred to Qian Xueli (the legal representative of Yiwu Er Yi Fashion Co., Ltd.).

He pointed out that the pfer itself has trading behavior. "He should know that Shanshan is a well-known trademark in the clothing industry, so there is a free riding behavior."

Huang Wushuang, vice president of the China Association for science and technology law and Deputy Secretary General of the Institute of intellectual property law, said that after the successful registration of such brands as "Shanshan fir", it is a matter of fact that if the same type of commodities are launched in the market in the future, it is bound to cause confusion.

Based on many factors, many people in the industry suggested that Shanshan could sue for the case.

In Wang Xuezheng's view, the subjective malice of "Shan Shan Fei Lai" trademark applicant is very clear, he does not use it himself, but sells it to a owner who has the same industry competition with Shan Shan.

"We believe that Shanshan Group can sue the enterprises that bought the brand of fir, and sue for infringement, buy the trademark and intend to use it."

He said that once the case was resolved, it would be meaningful to declare the trademark invalid.

China's trademark registration is the first place in the world, which is profitable and contributes to the "rush".

Wang Xuezheng, head of the statute Department of the former State Administration for Industry and commerce, and leader of the drafting group of the anti unfair competition law, told the reporter an astonishing number: at present, China's trademark development has been flourishing unprecedentedly, even though the first trademark has been about 10000000 in the whole country, now every 9 people in China have a trademark.

It has been reported that as of the end of December 2014, China registered 15 million 527 thousand applications for trademark registration, totaling 10 million 27 thousand registered trademarks and 8 million 390 thousand registered trademarks, keeping the number one in the world.

In fact, most trademarks are not really put into use, but they are used for "rush" and "brand name" investments.

Recently, Luzhou Laojiao reported the two companies to the court, claiming that they were suspected of being "brand name" and infringed the well-known registered trademark of the company and claimed 500 thousand yuan.

"Online" because of the alleged infringement of "joint" trademark right after being prosecuted, "millet e loan" also because of the use of "millet" brand by the millet technology limited liability company to the court, claim 1 million yuan.

The first instance of the Guangzhou intermediate people's court decided that NEW BALANCE, a related company in China, the new hundred Lun Trading (China) Co., Ltd. constituted infringement on the use of new registered trademarks of others.

The amount of compensation in the first instance was 98 million yuan, causing a great stir in the industry.

A trademark expert pointed out in an interview with reporters that there are two reasons for the "rush registration", one is the social ideological level, and the other is the legal defects.

He pointed out that "in the judicial way, some of the registered trademarks, but in the right to protect their rights, they can get high compensation, coupled with some ways to get high repurchase funds, which to a certain extent also encouraged the rush to trademark."

Wang Xuezheng suggested that in the future, the registration process of trademark registration should be stricter. In addition to strengthening the law enforcement on unfair competition in the use of trademarks, we should also strengthen the process of trademark registration.

"According to the implementation requirements of the new trademark law and the current situation of trademark infringement in the commodity market, the Trademark Office and the trademark hearing committee may be further modifying the rules for trademark identification and approval, which needs to be speeded up."

Huang Wushuang, vice president of the China Association for science and technology law and Deputy Secretary General of the Institute of intellectual property law, pointed out that at present, the workload of the national trademark office, including the judges, is relatively large. In the future, we can consider that when a trademark review is divided, a case can be carried out by a collegial panel in order to improve efficiency.

On the other hand, experts also expressed the need for well-known trademark enterprises to pay close attention to trademark notices, effectively give evidence in accordance with procedures, and take effective measures to protect rights and interests of trademarks.

At the same time, in the revision of trademark law, it is hoped that the majority of enterprises can join in, rather than just making recommendations through scholars and industry lawyers.