Tsingtao Beer won the "Laoshan" trademark defense battle and successfully opposed the "Laoshan Peninsula" trademark

Tsingtao Beer was founded in 1903, with a long history of nearly 120 years, the long time span has given "Tsingtao Beer" enough influence and extremely high visibility, its success was selected in China's first ten well-known trademarks, the brand value is self-evident. Laoshan Beer is also widely known as the second brand of Tsingtao Beer Co., LTD.

image-20220923172350-1.png

For a long time, some businesses in order to attract attention, expand the market, quick profits, usually through the "brand-name" "free ride" behavior to take shortcuts. This is not, a Qingdao food company in 32 types of beer, plant drinks and other products applied for the "Laoshan Peninsula" trademark.

image-20220923172405-2.png

After the announcement of the preliminary examination of the trademark, Qingdao Beer Co., Ltd. filed a trademark objection application within the announcement period to block. The reasons for its objection are: First, No. 42184885 "LAOSHAN Peninsula" trademark and its company No. 980688 "Laoshan" trademark, No. 6026950 "Laoshan" trademark, No. 17555796 "Lao Beer", No. 20113861 "Lao Beer" trademark, No. 11958952 "Laoshan" trademark, No. 25008850" Laoshan Wind "trademark and Laoshan King Laoshan King" trademark No. 1299381 constitute similar trademarks on the same or similar goods; Second, "Laoshan" trademark has been identified as a well-known trademark, "Laoshan Peninsula" trademark is a copy of "Laoshan" well-known trademark; Third, the registration and use of the trademark "Laoshan Peninsula" is deceptive, which is easy to make the public misidentify the characteristics or origin of the goods; 4. Qingdao Food Company's malicious application for the registration of the "Laoshan Peninsula" trademark violates the principle of good faith and will bring great damage to consumers and the entire market order.

image-20220923172425-3.png

After examination, the State Trademark Office determined that the trademarks of the two sides are similar in terms of text composition and call, and have constituted similar trademarks used on similar goods, and the coexistence of use is easy to cause consumer confusion and misidentification. basisTrademark ActArticle 30, 35, decided: No. 42184885 "Laoshan Peninsula" trademark shall not be registered.

A food company in Qingdao refused to accept the decision of the trademark Office and applied for a review of the registration, and the State Intellectual Property Office held that the disputed trademark "Laoshan Peninsula" and the cited trademarks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 had been constitutedTrademark ActSimilar trademarks referred to in Article 30 on the same or similar goods. Decision: The opposed trademark shall not be approved for registration on the goods under review. At this point, Qingdao Beer successfully opposed the "Laoshan Peninsula" trademark.

According to the official website of the Trademark Office, Tsingtao Beer Co., Ltd. has a total of 1966 trademark information, its core products "Tsingtao beer", "Laoshan beer" and so on have done the full category registration protection, and Laoshan similar names such as Luoshan, Luoshui, Lao Shui have also done the relevant defense layout, brand protection work is relatively comprehensive.

 

When enterprises encounter the phenomenon of "brand-name", they should promptly protect themselves through trademark objection and trademark invalidation procedures, so as to effectively maintain the uniqueness and stability of trademark brands. When encountering trademark infringement, it should also promptly defend its rights through judicial procedures, and do not give any opportunity to businesses with bad intentions.

image-20220923172540-4.png

image-20220923172545-5.png

Trademark as the first step of enterprise development is crucial, the steady development of an enterprise can not be separated from the overall layout of the trademark brand, only comprehensive and stable defense protection, in order to effectively prevent trademark infringement and "brand-name" "free riding" behavior. In addition, this case also tells us that there is a risk of brand-name, free-riding needs to be cautious, enterprises should update their own concepts, refuse to "trademark attachment", say goodbye to opportunism, intentions to do a good job of products, win consumer trust. (Source: Shi Rui, Trademark Circle)

 

Expertise sharing

Trademark Act[Article 22] An applicant for trademark registration shall, in accordance with the prescribed list of classification of commodities, report the class of commodities and the name of the commodities in which the trademark is to be used, and file an application for registration.

 

An applicant for trademark registration may apply for the registration of the same trademark in respect of multiple classes of goods through one application.

 

An application for trademark registration and other relevant documents may be submitted in writing or by electronic message.

More information and services

 

The official subscription number of "Shenkexin Intellectual Property Rights" on the code

官方订阅号.jpg

Code on the concern [Shenkexin intellectual property service platform] official service number

官方服务号.jpeg

Related Cases

Case Exhibition 丨 Information disclosure issues and determination of trademark confusion in the US trademark infringement lawsuit

The case is an Uncommon trademark infringement dispute in the United States, with the plaintiff being Uncommon,LLC and the defendant being Spigen, Inc. Both plaintiff and defendant are manufacturers and retailers of mobile phone cases. The plaintiff began promoting the "CAPSULE" brand of phone cases in 2009, and the first transaction of this product occurred in July 2010. Then, in September 2012, the plaintiff applied to the United States Patent and Trademark Office for registration of trademark No. 4338254, the trademark information is as follows:

2022-09-22

Detail

Nanjing big name file won the trademark rights lawsuit, whether the "big name file" should be changed?

Nanjing Dapai has won two trademark cases against it in Anhui. On July 11 and August 31, 2022, the Hefei Intermediate People's Court successively ruled in two judgments that Nanjing Dahui Enterprise Development Co., LTD. (referred to as Nanjing Dahui), the owner of Nanjing Dahui File, won the case.

2022-09-21

Detail

Trademarks can not be used at will, infringement "business" can not be done!

When it comes to intellectual property, this is a topic that is often neglected, but is closely related to everyone. When you open a book at random, when you buy a bottle of toilet water or a lipstick, when you chat with friends on wechat send a meme... Recently, the People's Court of Luxi County in Jiangxi Province successfully mediated a intellectual property dispute.

2022-09-20

Detail

No. 38765119 "Lipstick First Brother" trademark objection case

Cui Shudong, Director of the Trademark Office of the State Intellectual Property Office, pointed out at the release and interpretation of the "2021 Typical Cases of Trademark Opposition and Review" that the trademark opposition and review procedure is an important part of the trademark authorization and confirmation, which plays an important role in strengthening the source protection of intellectual property rights and optimizing the business environment.

2022-09-20

Detail

"Gubei Water Town" trademark dispute - malicious registration and abuse of trademark rights constitute unfair competition, the court ruled!

Recently, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court concluded a dispute over unfair competition involving the malicious registration of the "Gubei Water Town" trademark and abuse of trademark rights.

2022-09-16

Detail

Can I use the words "Moutai" and "Kweichow Moutai" on the decoration and business card of the shop for selling genuine Maotai wine?

Recently, Shanghai Minhang Court concluded a dispute on infringement of the "Moutai" registered trademark rights. Coincidentally, in April this year, a liquor company in Chengdu, Sichuan province, was accused of infringing on the "Moutai" trademark.

2022-09-13

Detail

"Dali" against "Dali Garden", see this "trademark attachment" behavior how the court adjudication

Brand is an important carrier to build a modern economic system, but also to promote high-quality economic development and enhance international competitiveness of the core elements. In recent years, Fujian courts have given full play to the functions of the people's courts in combating infringement and counterfeiting and optimizing the business environment. By strengthening the trial of cases in key areas such as platform economy, scientific and technological innovation, information security and livelihood protection, and timely releasing typical cases, Fujian courts have strengthened the judicial protection of well-known trademarks, well-known brands and time-honored brands, effectively promoting fair market competition. We will maintain the normal order of the market and guide the whole society to form a good atmosphere of respecting intellectual property rights, operating with integrity, cultivating brands, and encouraging innovation.

2022-09-09

Detail

Huawei Little Princess "Yao Anna" trademark invalidation case - severely crack down on damage to the name rights of public figures (including real name, stage name, translated name, alias) or other improper means to obtain registration

Yao Anna No. 36878950 "Yao Anna" trademark was applied for registration by the respondent Guo, approved for use in cosmetics and other commodities. The trademark was declared invalid by Yao Siwei and Huawei Technologies Co., LTD. (i.e., applicants 1 and 2 in this case). Applicant 1, whose stage name is "Yao Anna", is well known due to his association with Applicant 2 and Ren Zhengfei. The respondent failed to provide a reasonable source for the word "YAOANNA", and maliciously registered YAO Anna's English name "ANNABEL YAO" and pinyin "YAOANNA" and "Yao Anna".

2022-09-05

Detail

People's Music Publishing House added a court hearing announcement, the cause of the dispute over trademark infringement

Recently, the People's Music Publishing House Co., Ltd. added a court announcement, the case of infringement of trademark rights disputes. Plaintiff: People's Music Publishing House Co., LTD. Defendant: Shaoxing City Shangyu District Mingyin Music Company.

2022-08-31

Detail

Trademark & Unfair competition case | knock-off is impossible to guard against, buy "Siemens" home change "west door."

There are many "West Gate" appliances, Siemens has sued the court in fact, consumers want to buy Siemens appliances but bought back "West Gate" is not a case. These users who buy "West Gate" electrical appliances are basically introduced to buy goods, and when they buy, the other party is introduced to "Siemens" and "big brand". In October last year, Ms. Wang of Zhengzhou also bought a "West door opening" for the new home to add a lampblack machine, and finally complained to the market supervision department. In July last year, Shenzhen Siemens L & Auer Electrical Equipment Co. Ltd. was also sued by Siemens China for trademark infringement.

2022-08-30

Detail
5fa71b43-ff57-4550-a010-a0bec2f75bb4.png

Head Office13 / F, Building 14, Longhua Science and Technology Innovation Center (Mission Hills), No. 8 Golf Avenue, Guanlan Street, Longhua District, Shenzhen

Head Office

13 / F, Building 14, Longhua Science and Technology Innovation Center (Mission Hills), No. 8 Golf Avenue, Guanlan Street, Longhua District, Shenzhen

5fa71b43-ff57-4550-a010-a0bec2f75bb4.png

Subsidiary Company2808, Block B2, Yuexiu Xinghui Junbo, No.18 Tazihu East Road, Jiangan District, Wuhan City, Hubei Province

Subsidiary Company

2808, Block B2, Yuexiu Xinghui Junbo, No.18 Tazihu East Road, Jiangan District, Wuhan City, Hubei Province

图片名称

Service Number

订阅号.jpg

Subscription Number


Copyright ©2016 Shenzhen Shenkexin patent Agency Co., LTD All rights reserved | 粤ICP备2021174526号

Copyright ©2016 深圳市深可信专利代理有限公司 版权所有 | 粤ICP备2021174526号 SEO标签

Copyright ©2016 深圳市深可信专利代理有限公司 版权所有

粤ICP备2021174526号