Trademark registration
Contact Us

Phone: 0571-4523789

Fax: 0571-4523789




Tobacco control organizations sued the judges withdraw Zhongnanhai cigarette brand was rejected

    that "here" as a cigarette logo harm the image of the central State organs, and apt to mislead consumers, and tobacco control organizations to sue the Administration for industry and Commerce trademark review and adjudication Board (hereinafter "judges"), for rescission of Zhongnanhai cigarette trade marks. Yesterday, the reporter was informed that the Court rejected the demands of the plaintiff's new Research Center for health development, new research and Development Center to prepare an appeal.

    trademark is valid as the focus

    was made on December 9, in the first instance judgment, felt that the existing trademark law article 64th stipulated in the second paragraph of "trademarks registered prior to the implementation of this Act remain in force" demonstrates both the legislation and the basic principles of the current trademark law, as well as under the trademark had been registered before the implementation, And through the use of a certain impact and corresponding market share of trademarks and protected rights of way. "Met" the disputed trademark application and registration time is prior to the coming into force of the trademark law in force, the disputed trademark should therefore remain in force.

    new research on agents of the Centre for health research for development Huang Jinrong said in 2001, prior to the implementation of the trademark law, here already registered shall continue to be valid, but the validity of the registered trademark for a period of ten years after the end of the application for renewal of registration, it must comply with the provisions of the existing law. Therefore, the 2007 judges in handling here trademark renewal applications should not be approved, in the case of already approved, should be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the trademark law shall be revoked.

    trademark is misleading?

    new research on health research for Development Centre is one reason for the cancellation of a registered trademark, place names feature in Zhongnanhai will be misleading to consumers. A in the hospital think, since dispute trademark get registered yilai, Beijing cigarette factory after long-term of market foster, has makes its has second logo features and corresponding of significantly sex, that related consumers in see or purchase dispute trademark approved using of commodity Shi, not will here of names features and the commodity phase contact, more not formed plaintiffs v said of "makes public on the tobacco products produced ' by central State recognized ', and ' authority ' and ' high quality ', errors impression".

    on this, Huang Jinrong lawyer said, 2001 of trademark law is no longer allows "with central State location specific locations of name or logo sex buildings of name, and graphics same of" logo as trademark using, its fundamental of reasons on is will above logo as trademark using very easy misleading consumers, will let people on with above logo of commodity produced and Central State phase contact of "authority" Lenovo. Worthy of note is that "here" controversial logo are trademarks of cigarette cases, continue to allow you to use it will not only mislead consumers with regard to, but also harm the image of the Government is a big problem.

    how to understand the validity period is the key

    new research on health research for Development Centre in 2009 to apply to the judge dismiss the met trademarks. In August, the judge ruled, dismissing the application. Subsequently, the Centre take trab and cigarette factory to a hospital. General review of previous similar cases also ended in against the plaintiff.

    Huang Jinrong in counsel's view, this stems from a few different understanding of the law. The plaintiff considered here trademarks registered in 1997, ten years is due for renewal in 2007, when, in accordance with the provisions of the trademark law revoked. "But in the judgment, the Court did not mention the views on the system of trademark validity of ten years of. "Huang Jinrong said, new research and Development Center will soon appeal.