中国国语毛片免费观看视频-久久久久久久亚洲av无码-av无码精品一区二区三区四区-亚洲国产精品无码久久久秋霞2

On March 30, 2020, the Supreme People’s Court issued a retrial decision, confirming previous judgments rendered by Hangzhou Intermediate Court and Zhejiang High Court, which had dismissed an infringement claim initiated by a Chinese registered trademark owner against the world-famous brand Michael Kors. The courts, however, took the precaution to explain that, when the prior (or senior) trademark has a low reputation and the later (or junior) trademark is well known, there is a risk of “reverse confusion” to the effect that the “senior” trademark might be deprived of the ability to expand because the consumers may be misled to believe that its products carry the well-known brand. In such a situation, the courts consider that protection should still be granted to the owner of the “senior”, registered yet unknown to the public, trademark.

The fourth amendment of China’s Trademark Law has come into force on November 1, 2019. The revised Article 4 of the Law now reads: "trademark filed in bad faith without intention to use shall be rejected". This modified version of article 4 is also mentioned in Article 44.1 of the Law, which provides that any trademark registered in violation of Article 4 and any trademark registered by fraudulent or unfair means, shall be declared invalid.

The China Trade Mark Office (CTMO) of CNIPA announced on 18 February 2020 that it will publish trademark opposition decisions as of 1 January 2020.

During the year 2020, some interesting trademark cases were adjudicated which showcases that the level of protection of trademark rights in China is constantly rising. Most of the judgments were rendered by the Beijing IP Court and the Beijing High Court, in prosecution disputes handled by the trademark administration, i.e., the China Trademark Office (CTMO) and the Trademark Review & Adjudication Board (TRAB) replaced by the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) after the recent administrative reshuffling.  Other civil infringement cases illustrate the raising level of financial compensation awarded by the courts, who do not hesitate to use punitive damages and endorse contractual damages.

During the year 2020, some interesting trademark cases were adjudicated which showcases that the level of protection of trademark rights in China is constantly rising. Most of the judgments were rendered by the Beijing IP Court and the Beijing High Court, in prosecution disputes handled by the trademark administration, i.e., the China Trademark Office (CTMO) and the Trademark Review & Adjudication Board (TRAB) replaced by the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) after the recent administrative reshuffling.  Other civil infringement cases illustrate the raising level of financial compensation awarded by the courts, who do not hesitate to use punitive damages and endorse contractual damages.

When goods are manufactured in China by an OEM factory for export, the foreign buyer is not always the owner, in China, of the trademark that is affixed on the goods.
Then, a serious question arises: what if the trademark is registered in the name of a third party, and such third party decides to sue the factory for infringement, and stop the exportation of the goods?

Article 10 of China’s Trademark Law enumerates circumstances where a trademark application will be ex officio refused by the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA). These circumstances are known as absolute grounds. Article 10.1.2 prohibits inter alia a sign, which is identical with or similar to the national flag of a foreign country, from being used (and registered) as a trademark, unless the consent of the government of that country is obtained.

China started to work on the third amendment to its “Trademark Law” in 2003 (the second amendment was adopted in 2001 when China joined WTO). After six years of research, investigation and soliciting opinions and comments from the public about many drafts, the State Administration for Industry & Commerce, submitted to the State Council a final draft on November 18, 2009.