Trademark Protection Research Articles

Legal protection of green trademarks in the Eurasian Economic Union

Rapid development of integration processes in the post-Soviet space leads to the formation of supranational legal regulation within the framework of regional international organizations. The Eurasian Economic Union is no exception. The authors study the process of harmonization of normative regulation of legal protection of trademarks in the national legislation of the Eurasian Economic Union member states taking into account the provisions of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union and other international agreements. As a result of the analysis, the authors conclude that the national trademark legislation of the Eurasian Economic Union Member States is not sufficiently unified, which may have a negative impact on the legal protection of trademarks in individual countries.

Protection of Color Trademarks Delimited by Non-Distinctive Shapes

Protection of Color Trademarks Delimited by Non-Distinctive Shapes

The Covid Pandemic, The Empowering Olympic, Paralympic and Amateur Athletes Act and the Dawn of a New Age of U.S. Olympic Reform

In the fall of 2020, Congress enacted the first substantive changes in the Governance of the Olympic Sports system in over four decades. The new law, The Empowering Olympic, Paralympic and Amateur Athletes Act, was passed in the wake of sexual abuse scandals that rocked certain governing bodies. In amending the 1978 Amateur Sports Act, the new law grants Congress the power to decertify the United States Olympic bodies, mandates greater athlete representation in governance, increases funding to protect athletes through greater support of USA Safe Sport. Aside from the decertification power, the most significant provision of the new law is the establishment of a Commission on the State of U.S. Olympics and Paralympics to review the governance of the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee (“USOPC”) and make proposals for change. The Commission’s creation comes at a crucial time in U.S. Olympic governance. Due to the governance scandals, uncertain funding and the general national sports upheaval caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, this article advocates more significant changes to the Olympic structure that the commission should consider, such as direct or indirect government funding for the USOPC and the sport governing bodies in return for adherence to more stringent transparency and ethical rules. Ideas that the Commission could consider include mandatory disclosure of information such as sponsorship agreements and compensation and bonus limitations for those in key leadership positions, the appointment of an inspector-general and greater athlete involvement in the U.S. Olympic movement. The article also proposes more statutory changes such as a limited antitrust exemption and the end of special trademark protections for the USOPC.

Amendments to the Argentine Trademark Law: Initial Impact

Abstract This paper examines the principal changes to the Argentine Trademark Law in 2018. The aim of these amendments was to reduce bureaucracy and simplify administrative procedures in a vast diversity of areas besides intellectual property, such as corporate, finance, insurance and labor matters, among others. With respect to intellectual property, however, some of the changes seem to be substantive and not merely procedural. The purpose of this article is to analyze the changes to the Argentine Trademark Law and provide a practical reference guide in relation to trademark protection in Argentina. The authors discuss how the system for resolving oppositions has been simplified, reducing time and costs to obtain registrations. In addition, the authors provide a comparative review of some of the judicial decisions ruled on the merit of oppositions and those adopted by the National Institute of Industrial Property in 2020. Based on this comparative case law and the analysis of the amendments to the new law, the authors share their views on the implementation of the changes and their application in practice, which may serve as a starting point for those interested in registering their trademarks in Argentina. They conclude that the modifications to the Argentine Trademark Law are positive and aim to bring the Argentine system in line with international standards.

OFF-WHITE wins trade mark protection

Abstract Case T-133/19 Off-White v EUIPO, ECLI:EU:T:2020:293, 25 June 2020

Trademark Law Pluralism

In recent years, trademark scholars have come to recognize that the supply of words, sounds, and symbols available to designate new goods and services is an exhaustible resource. In certain sectors, the most common Eng-lish words and syllables and the most common U.S. surnames are almost all claimed as marks. Some firms have responded by resorting to ever-more-unusual brand names so as to avoid trademark disputes. Scholars have pro-posed solutions ranging from raising registration fees to narrowing the scope of trademark rights. In this Article, we frame trademark law’s governance of “linguistic space” as a balancing act between what we term proximity costs and distance costs. Proximity costs, the conventional focus of trademark doctrine, occur when different firms use marks that are close in linguistic space—think Zan-tac (for heartburn) versus Xanax (for anxiety). Distance costs arise when firms use marks that are difficult to remember because of their length or their far remove from the core of semantic signifiers familiar to most consumers—staying in the medicine cabinet, think Valsartan (for high blood pressure) or Namzaric (for memory loss). Although conceptually different, proximity costs and distance costs both create similar practical problems. Both make it more difficult for consumers to purchase and communicate about brands, and both make it harder for new entrants to establish and defend their market share. Our proximity-distance framing has conceptual payoffs for trademark law. We explain why responses to the crowding of linguistic space internal to trademark law cannot escape some tradeoff between proximity costs and dis-tance costs. Allowing mark holders to control a larger swath of linguistic space reduces proximity costs, but at the expense of pushing other firms to the periphery of linguistic space, increasing distance costs. Similarly, weak-ening trademark protection to allow more firms to locate their marks in the linguistic core reduces distance costs, but with some increase in proximity costs. Our framing thus shows how the policy problems of trademark law parallel the challenges of managing scarcity in real property. As we draw in-spiration from solutions to urban congestion and sprawl, we suggest how nontrademark interventions can lead to more efficient use of linguistic space, promoting product identification without raising proximity or distance costs. Our approach thus points to the possibility of using a plurality of legal and policy tools to address the proximity-distance dilemma at trademark law’s heart. And by relieving some of the pressure on trademark law to resolve the proximity-distance dilemma on its own, our approach frees trademark law to pursue a wider range of goals and to vindicate a broader variety of values.

Al-‘Alāmah al-Tijāriyyah wa Ḥimāyatuhā fī al-Qānūn al-Indūnīsī: Dirāsah Fiqhiyyah Taqwīmiyyah

The trademark plays an important role in economic life, as it is a way for the merchant to distinguish his products from those produced by others. It also helps consumers to identify the products they want. Therefore, the countries of the world have agreed to conduct agreements to protect it, on top of which is the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). When the State of Indonesia agreed to sign this agreement, it had to provide legal cover in the field of the trademark. The research aims to demonstrate trademark protection in Indonesian law and Islamic jurisprudence. This research falls within the library search, and its description is an analytical and critical description. After careful consideration, the research concludes that Indonesian law and Islamic jurisprudence are in agreement of considering the trademark as property and right. So, they agree on the necessity of trademark protection and imposing the punishment for the aggressor. Meanwhile, they differ in the imprisonment; the law considers it as a basic punishment while Islamic jurisprudence considers it as a secondary punishment

The Solution to Overcome Conflicts in the Protection of Trademarks and Trade Names

Abstract: The objective of this paper is to propose solutions to overcome conflicts between industrial property rights over trademarks and industrial property rights over trade names. The research tasks consist of: Identifying the cause and the nature of the conflict, the mechanism to deal with the conflict under Vietnam current law; Pointing out unresolved issues in that mechanism, comparing with intellectual property law and practice of other countries to look for proper solutions for Vietnam.

Analysis on Anti-dilution Protection of Well-known Trademark

A well-known trademark is one that is familiar to the public and has a higher reputation in the market, but dilution refers to the phenomenon that the trademark is weakened or even damaged. In addition, well-known trademark and the Socialist market economy are inseparable, so the authors think It is necessary to explore the related system of well-known trademark and protest it. Through explaining the concept of well-known trademark and dilution, combining with the existing problems of well-known trademark, the paper shows that It is important to pay attention to the well-known trademark and protest the legitimate rights and interests of the well-known trademark. Through the above, some suggestions are put forward in order to solve the problem of dilution of well-known trademark.

Monopolizing Matratzen in Malaga: The Mistreatment of Distinctiveness of Foreign Terms in EU and US Trademark Law

Courts and scholars on both sides of the Atlantic have sometimes concluded that when domestic consumers do not understand the meaning of foreign terms, or are not likely to “stop and translate” them into the domestic language, the terms are not considered generic or descriptive, and thus should be eligible for immediate trademark protection. This article contends that trademark protection for terms that are generic or descriptive in a foreign language can have anticompetitive effects even when domestic consumers do not currently understand them. This is the case when the terms are likely to be needed in the future to name or describe distinct goods, or when there is a reasonable likelihood that foreign producers will incorporate the terms as part of composite marks. Thus, in most instances, foreign words should be analysed for distinctiveness in the context of their own languages, and should be excluded from protection if they are generic, or protected only upon a showing of secondary meaning if they are descriptive. The published version of this paper is available at 2018 Grur Int. 1118.

Design Patent Law’s Identity Crisis

Since its emergence during the industrial revolution nearly two centuries ago, design patent law has suffered from a profound identity crisis. Its drafters modeled the law nearly verbatim on the British copyright regime for surface ornamentation and sculptural features of three-dimensional articles such as textiles and stoves. Courts struggled to interpret protection for “useful” designs against the backdrop of a utility patent regime focused directly on technological inventions. Further complicating design patent’s role, some manufacturers used design patents as a nascent form of trademark protection until federal trademark protection emerged toward the end of the 19th century. In 1902, Congress clarified that design patents were limited to ornamental attributes of articles of manufacture and did not extend to functional attributes. Unfortunately, the Federal Circuit overlooked the legislation and the key regional circuit decisions interpreting it, cementing design patent law’s identity crisis into place. This article traces the origins of the ornamentality/non-functionality doctrine and shows how several early cases using the “dictated solely by utilitarian considerations” phrasing to deny design patent protection were misinterpreted to be the standard for determining whether a design was eligible for design patent protection. These decisions merely explained that designs “dictated solely by utilitarian considerations” were clearly outside of design patent eligibility. They did not mean that designs that only partially affected functionality qualified for design patents. Unfortunately, inattentive and protectionist judicial opinions caused the standard to drift far from these holdings and into direct conflict with the clear language and intent of the 1902 design patent amendments and fundamental, overarching intellectual property law principles reflected in the Supreme Court’s seminal Baker v. Selden decision. This article aims to correct this fundamental misinterpretation of intellectual property law. Part I tells the remarkable story of how the effort to transplant England’s design copyright regime to the United States spawned a confusingly labeled “design patent” regime and examines the confusion wrought by this mislabeled law during the mid to late 19th century. It also reveals a period in which design patent law served as a proto-federal trademark registration system before Congress established federal trademark protection in the late 19th century. Remnants of that dalliance still confusingly resonate in the design patent system today. Part II explores the 1902 amendments, which unequivocally limited design patents to the ornamental features of articles of manufacture and made clear that they did not extend design patent protection to functional elements. Part III traces the emergence and distortion of the ornamentality/non-functionality doctrine. The early decisions clearly grasped the need to exclude functionality from design patents. Unfortunately, later cases misapplied some of the language of those cases, resulting in standards that contradict the 1902 (and 1952) Acts as well as the logic reflected in Baker v. Selden and other Supreme Court cases dealing with the structure of the intellectual property system. Part IV traces the Federal Circuit’s tilting of the ornamentality/non-functionality doctrine toward over-broad protection of functionality within the design patent regime. Part V explores the forces that have led the design patent regime astray. Part VI proposes ways of rectifying design patent law’s wayward drift to restore fidelity to the statutory language and the overarching logic of the intellectual property system.

Criminal Trademark Protection in Algerian Law and Saudi Legal System

من أجل تمييز المنتجات والخدمات بعضها عن بعض وضمان عدم وقوع المستهلك أو المشتري في الخلط بينها، لجأت الشركات إلى ابتكار علامات تجارية للترويج لمنتجاتها حتى لا تكون عرضة للتقليد، وتضمن بمقتضاها جذب العملاء وإتاحة فرصة الاختيار والمفاضلة بين المنتجات والخدمات المشابهة والمماثلة المعروضة في السوق. ونظرًا للأهمية التي تكتسبها العلامة التجارية، لكونها وسيلة للتعبير عن ذاتية المنتج أو الخدمة الموضوعة عليها ونسبتها إلى مالكها، كان لا بد أن تحاط بجملة من الضمانات القانونية من أجل حمايتها حتى لا تكون عرضة للتقليد أو التزوير.وتبعًا لذلك تسعى الدراسة إلى الوقوف على آليات الحماية القانونية المقررة للعلامة التجارية في التشريعين الجزائري والسعودي، لمعرفة مدى التشابه بينهما. وقد تمخضت الدراسة على أن المشرعين الجزائري والسعودي سلكا موقفًا إيجابيًا بإقرارهما للحماية الجنائية للعلامة التجارية، وتوقيعهما لعقوبات رادعة يحققان بمقتضاها الغرض من العقوبة، ومن جهة أخرى يعاب عليهما أنهما ربطا الحماية بإجراء شكلي وهو إيداع العلامة أو تسجيلها كشرط لحمايتها. ومن أجل ذلك، توصي الدراسة بضرورة إعادة النظر في شروط الحماية المقررة للعلامة التجارية، فلا يعقل أن يحرم صاحب الحق من حقه لمجرد عدم قيامه بإجراء شكلي.

THE USE OF TRADEMARKS (TRADE NAMES) AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE

The main stages of formation of own name, style, image of the manufacturer of own products were analyzed in this article. One of the main criteria of a product and the most important source of information about products (goods) at the market is presence of marking (brand name, sign, image, style, etc.). Presence of label elements makes up individualization of goods and services. The term ‘trademark’ refers to a trade-mark or its juridically protected part that gives a shop assistant the exclusive right to use a brand name or a brand mark.
 There is no doubt that the use of a trademark is a kind of link between manufacturers and consumers, an effective method for attracting customers attention to the product allowing consumers to choose appropriate products of a particular manufacturer.
 It should be noted that one of the means of identifying a product is marking. Marking is considered to be an integral part of goods. It provides consumers with relevant information on a corresponding product, container and packaging. It also reflects quality and safety of products. Significance of trademarks-brands is increasing considerably in conditions of market-oriented economy for distinguishing the same goods produced by different manufacturers. Since goods introduced to consumer market by different manufacturers always differ by characteristics, features, qualities, etc. A trademark (brand) is a sign that helps to distinguish a product of one manufacturer from the same product of another.
 The growing role of brands and trademarks is stressed in today international market. Thus, a manufacturer is in front of the choice of registration of trademarks which in turn become objects of intellectual property. However, creating an exclusive international scale brand is only possible for large commodity producers who are able to produce quality goods delivered to different markets and invest enormously into their promotion. Accordingly, trademark holders aim to protect their products from counterfeiting, individualize them and promote at the consumer market in a civilized way. But there are many people who want to make money using a name of a famous brand, therefore, counterfeiting that spoils reputation of a brand manufacturer appears. This problem is connected with a large number of counterfeiting illegally imported into the territory of Ukraine without commodity accompanying documents, and then sold in stores and markets.
 Thus, known trademarks are required to be registered in accordance with the current legislation in order to avoid cases of illegal copying.
 To conclude, registration of a trademark is a preventive and protective measure aimed at preventing violations of the rights of an owner. The modern regulatory framework regulating protection of trademarks as objects of intellectual property in Ukraine, in general, complies with international standards, but needs to be further improved taking into consideration counterfeiting at the market.

FDI inflows and intellectual property rights for MNEs in emerging markets: an alternative approach through the lens of trademarks in Vietnam (1986-2016)

PurposeWhile the current anti-globalisation wave is considered as a regional and cyclical relapse among Western countries, the new era of globalisation has shifted away from stagnant developed economies towards the rising prosperity of emerging Asia, where it is attracting substantial global inward foreign direct investment (FDI). Focussing on Vietnam, the country that is seen as Asia’s next economic tiger, the question of how important intellectual properties (IP) protection is in the international competition for FDI inflows is still unsettled, especially on the under-researched topic of trademarks.Design/methodology/approachThis paper takes on the business history approach, which allows rich evidence from the dynamic and evolving natures of multinational enterprises (MNEs) to drive the research process, so that international business scholars can test models rigorously. The evidence provided in this paper is essentially qualitative and combines trademark registrations data, with trade and FDI statistics between 1986 and 2016, also draws on companies’ archives, industry reports and related newspaper articles.FindingsThis paper provides the chronology of intellectual property right (IPR) legal landscapes and the dynamic co-evolution of trademarks and FDI inflows in Vietnam. Three trademark protection strategies for MNEs and their patterns here are addressed. The paper also argues that trademarks bring new insights and IP protection strategy for pharmaceutical MNEs for the case of Vietnam is as important in trademarks as it is in patents. In emerging markets with strong incentives for FDI such as Vietnam, MNEs are not necessarily put off by weak IPR, but rather create alternative strategies for dealing with the lack of IP protection in these emerging market settings.Originality/valueThis study challenges the stream of thoughts that view trademarks as a “neglected intangible asset” among different IPRs, while in fact, trademarks advance MNEs’ knowledge by ensuring competitiveness and long-run survival in emerging markets. This paper is among the first few attempts to look at pharmaceutical industry through the lens of trademarks, moving away from the traditional patent-focussed approach. It extends the understanding of OLI paradigm and highlights that MNEs need to possess Oa and Op advantages not only at the beginning of internationalisation process but rather evolving through the time to cope with imitation risks in the host country.

Headaches and Handbags: A Fragility Theory of Trademark Functionality

A group of test subjects are randomly assigned one of two treatments for their frequent headaches: generic or brand-name ibuprofen. Subjects taking the branded ibuprofen, Nurofen®, report markedly greater pain relief and fewer side effects than the generic group. The experiment is repeated with new subjects, but this time the Nurofen pills are replaced by Nurofen-labeled placebos. The result still holds. A sugar pill with a trademark can outperform genuine, but unbranded, pharmaceuticals. According to functionality doctrine, trademark protection cannot be granted for any feature that is essential to the product’s use or purpose, or affects the product’s cost or quality. But because of the placebo effect, even seemingly inert names and symbols are imbued with precisely this kind of power. In fact, a wide variety of real-world phenomena challenge the prevailing understanding of trademark functionality, from the social uses of high-fashion marks to the cost reductions enabled by certification marks. More fundamentally, a valuable trademark of any kind should act to reduce search costs for consumers and improve quality through the mechanism of reputation. And yet, rather than leading to invalidation, all of these well-documented functionalities are apparently tolerated by trademark law—sometimes merely ignored, but often celebrated explicitly. This article proposes a more unified theory of functionality: fragility. Some product features affect cost, quality, use, and purpose in ways that are non-fragile—the effects would persist even if every producer were to copy the same feature. But some features affect the product in ways that are fragile—the effects would be degraded or broken through unchecked copying. In reality, only non-fragile functionalities are actually prohibited, whereas fragile functionalities are permitted and even encouraged. In a manner surprisingly similar to patent or copyright law, trademark law appears to carefully distinguish between improvements that require its protection in order to manifest, and those that do not. This fragility theory is not only a descriptive improvement in terms of explaining real-world case outcomes and the doctrine’s full history, but also a conceptual improvement that can be applied to all types of trademarks without issue. A generic term, for example, exhibits non-fragile linguistic functionality. Moreover, the idea of fragility suggests consistent answers to divisive boundary issues in trademark law, such as overlapping protection under copyright, anti-dilution rights, and post-sale confusion doctrine. At the same time, recognizing this fragility pattern calls attention to potentially adverse consequences in terms of distributive justice and market competition—consequences that trademark law itself may not be able to remedy.

Pazarlama Yönetiminde Markalar

Marka, bir işletmenin mal ve hizmetlerini bir başka işletmenin mal ve hizmetlerinden ayırt eder. Pazarlama yönetimi araçlarından olan markalar, müşteri zihinlerinde ürünlere ilişkin bir imaj oluşturur. Ürünlerin piyasa fiyatı, marka imajı ile oluşan değeri de içerir. Pazarlama açısından, marka değerine odaklanan birçok çalışma vardır. Küresel ortamda pazarlama stratejileri geliştirmede, markalaşma çabaları önem kazanmıştır. İşletmeler için sürdürülebilir rekabet avantajı sağlamada, marka oluşturma ve marka koruması önemli hale gelmiştir. Ülkeler açısından da, rekabet avantajı sağlamada yine marka oluşturmanın ve korumanın önemli rolü vardır. Ülkelerin rekabet gücünde önemli göstergeler olan ihracat/ milli gelir büyüklükleri ile marka oluşturma/koruma faaliyetleri arasında genelde benzer bir eğilim vardır. İşletmeler açısından marka oluşturma ve marka koruması, sürdürülebilir rekabet avantajı sağlayarak daha fazla getiri elde etmede vazgeçilmez öneme sahiptir.

미국 상표법에서의 신용이론의 역사적 발전과정과 상표보호의 확장

우리 상표법은 상표사용자의 업무상의 신용과 수요자의 이익이라는 두 가지 법익보호를 목적으로 한다. 따라서 상표사용자가 사용하기로 선택한 상표에 화체된 신용을 보호하는 것은 상표법의 목적에 부합한다. 역사적으로 미국법원은 표장 자체를 재산권으로 보호하는 법리를 채택하였다가, 신용을 재산권으로 보호하는 법리로 변경하였다. 신용을 재산권을 보호하는 법리는 전통적인 혼동이론에 근거한 상표보호에서 탈피하여, 상표보호의 확장을 인정할 수 있는 명시적 법적 근거가 되었다. 즉 상표법은 상표사용자의 표장에 화체된 신용을 재산권으로 보호한다는 법리는 동일, 유사상품이라는 경쟁적 상품의 영역에서 상표침해를 인정하는 것에서 탈피하여, 이종상품이라는 비경쟁적 상품의 영역에서 상표침해를 인정할 수 있는 법적도구로 활용되었다. 결과적으로 미국 상표법상 신용이론은 미국법원이 희석화이론, 구입후혼동이론, 최초관심혼동이론이라는 상표침해를 확장하는 법리를 채택할 수 있는 근거로 활용되었다. 그러나 신용이론에 입각하여 상표권의 보호범위를 지나치게 확장하는 것은 바람직하지 않다. 상표법은 상표사용자의 업무상의 신용과 수요자의 이익이라는 두 가지 법익을 균형적으로 보호하여야 하기 때문이다. 즉 상표법에서의 상표침해판단은 상표권자가 자신의 재산권을 통하여 향유하는 이익보호와 소비자의 출처혼동을 방지하는 수요자의 이익보호에 근거하여 합목적적으로 이루어져야 한다. 결국 신용이론에 근거한 상표보호의 확장에서 수요자의 이익이라는 상표법의 목적이 도외시 되어서는 아니 된다. 우리 상표법은 미국 상표법상 전통적인 혼동이론에 근거한 상표침해법리를 규정하고 있고, 우리 부정경쟁방지법은 미국 상표법상 비경쟁적 상품의 영역으로 상표침해를 확장하는 법리를 부정경쟁방지법상 부정경쟁행위로 인정하여 이를 규정하고 있다. 이러한 우리나라 상표법과 부정경쟁방지법에 대한 법제는 미국 상표법상 비경쟁적 상품 영역에서의 상표침해는 우리나라는 타 선진국에 비하여 신용이 많이 형성된 상표를 보유하고 있지 않다는 우리의 경제적 현실을 반영하는 것으로, 우리나라의 상표법과 부정경쟁방지법의 정책으로 “좋은 정책”이다.

PERSONA SELEBRITI: HAK PERUNDANGAN DI MALAYSIA

A celebrity has its own persona and has a right that can be protected by the law. The status of a celebrity can be obtained in certain circumstances such as through birth or descent as well as through skills or occupation. Celebrity rights are special and unique rights. This is because the right seems to be the property and belongs to the celebrity. The words celebrity is often associated with fame, money, power, publicity, extravaganza, achievements, fandom, culture, and is sometimes matters relating to scandal or even for something shameful. Accordingly, the public has no right to arbitrarily use the celebrity's right. Celebrity rights can be made up of three main rights which are personality, privacy, and publicity rights. In the age of social media, almost everyone can be a celebrity. Therefore, legal protection for celebrities is very important to be discussed. In Malaysia, there is no specific legislation regarding celebrity rights such as those found in other countries such as the United States. An issue that needs to be taken into account is in the absence of the specific law, how do the rights of these celebrities are legally protected in Malaysia. Therefore, this article discusses celebrity rights and related laws in Malaysia, especially under intellectual property law. This article applied the method of legal research through library research. This article concludes that while Malaysia does not have any specific legal provisions for celebrity rights, the infringement of celebrity rights can be catered upon through a variety of relevant laws such as intellectual property law like several provisions relating to copyright and trademark protection. In addition, with the advent of social media, celebrity rights are also protected by laws such as the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998. Privacy-related laws such as the Tort law and the Personal Data Protection Act 2010 can also be used to protect these celebrity rights.

Trademark protection of single-colour trademarks: a study of the Chinese Louboutin case

In December 2018, Beijing Higher Court released the final decision associated with Christian Louboutin's trademark registration of the famous Red Sole Mark, holding that the mark should be categorized as a single-colour mark applied to a specific portion of the good and it could be registered as a trademark in China. This decision is the first Chinese judicial opinion associated with trademark registrability of a single-colour mark applied to a specific portion of the good, and therefore it plays a significant role in future trademark protection of single-colour trademarks.

Enhancing the protection of trade marks against bad-faith applications in China: practice and legislative change

Enhancing the protection of trade marks against bad-faith applications in China: practice and legislative change