Beijing Long-Young Technology Co., Ltd. v. Wuhan Sanyuan Special Building Materials Co., Ltd. (Disputes over Unfair Competition)—The Difference Between “Unique Name of a Well-Known Commodity” and “Distinctiveness of a Trademark”

Part of the Library of Selected Cases from the Chinese Court book series (LSCCPC)


The requirement of Article 9 of the Trademark Law about the distinctiveness of the applying for a registered trademark is that it can be the source to identify the commodity. In the Article 5(2) in the Anti-Unfair Competition Law (in this article it refers to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law before amendment in November 4, 2017), the distinctiveness of the commodity’s name involved means to distinct it from the original reality. And it emphasizes that the name, packaging, and decoration have played a role in distinguishing the source of goods through used commercially. The focus of the review is the actual commercial use. The identification of the exclusive right to use a trademark does not prove that the logo has obtained the distinctiveness of Article 5(2) of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law.

Copyright information

© Law Press China 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of ChinaBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations