|
Traditionally, trade marks unregistered in China receive no protection if they are not famous on the market, meaning that consumers associate the brand with a specific company. So far, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) only accepted domestic evidence to prove the status of the trade mark on the market.
In Ryohin Keikaku (Muji) v TRAB, the SPC ruled that the evidence collected on the use of Muji (a Japanese company) in Japan and Hong Kong, including evidence on the trade mark's fame in those jurisdictions, could not be used to prove that the mark was famous in China. Based on these grounds, the SPC rejected the claim of trade mark ownership over the brand MUJI requested by a Chinese applicant.
However, recently in the case of Manolo Blahnik v TRAB, the SPC allowed the use of evidence regarding the existing fame of the brand before the disputed mark was applied. The company has not been selling directly in China, it has courted Chinese luxury consumers via stores in Tokyo, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei and Seoul. This case could be seen as a turning point in more than 20 years old legal dispute and maybe a new guiding case for many other similar cases of luxury brands that are still pending.
|
