3 Major Foreign Companies That Won the Trademark Cases in China Successfully

To save your product idea and brand image, money spent on filing trademark registration is a wise decision. Although the process of trademark registration in China is a bit time-taking, the protection and security it offers to your company are simply unparalleled. Even before your trademark is approved, the pending process could also deter counterfeiters to imitate your valued brand. Registering your trademark protects it from anyone that attempts to profit from your marketing and product development. Obtaining a registered trademark for your brand’s IP will allow you to use the registered trademark symbol “®” in the name, logo, designs, slogans, and any words associated with your brand.


Monitor New Trademark Applications

It’s your responsibility to monitor trademark registrations that might conflict with your registered mark. It is a good idea to monitor closely if someone else is trying to bring the same product that might conflict with your one.

Here is a list of foreign companies won trademark cases in China:


Alfred Dunhill– This year, British luxury label Alfred Dunhill—which specializes in menswear, leather goods, and accessories—won its trademark infringement lawsuit against Chinese brand Danhuoli.


New Balance– Boston, MA-based athletic shoe and apparel company New Balance had won a victory in a trademark infringement case in China against three defendants that had used the firm’s signature N logo to sell footwear under the brand name New Boom. A Chinese court has ruled that three domestic shoemakers must pay New Balance $1.5 million in damages. It the is largest trademark infringement award ever granted to a foreign business in China.


Michael Jordan– In 2016, China’s supreme court has ruled in favor of US basketball legend Michael Jordan in a trademark dispute.The People’s Supreme Court ruled a Chinese sportswear company must stop using the characters for Jordan’s name, read as Qiaodan in Chinese. In a ruling by the Chinese supreme court, Qiaodan Sports Co, based in south-eastern Fujian province, must stop using the Chinese characters for Qiaodan on its merchandise.

Can trademarks without the purpose of use be terminated?

Trademark squatting is a major issue in China. One of the greatest challenges that many foreign companies face when entering the Chinese market, is that their brand has already been registered as a trademark by a Chinese company. In order to tackle this problem, Chinese authorities have taken a few effective steps and made changes in the trademark law. The “purpose of use” added in Article 4 of the revised Trademark Law is the basic stone for all legal norms to curb the application for registration of malicious trademarks. According to the revised Trademark Law, applicants should be required to submit evidence of “actual use” or “honest use intention” at the time of registration of the trademark application.

Share with friends:

Anti-Dumping Duty and its Effect on the U.S.-China Trade Policy


An anti-dumping duty is a protectionist tariff that a domestic government imposes on foreign imports that it believes are priced below fair market value. Dumping is a process wherein a company exports a product at a price that is significantly lower than the price it normally charges in its home (or its domestic) market.


China’s recent legislative changes have largely facilitated and promoted foreign trade and investment. The new Anti-Dumping Regulations differ from most other recent trade laws and regulations because they are designed to protect local industries. The Regulations allow China to deliberately protect local industry and yet enjoy the protection of GATT authority.


Since the Regulations are so simple and lack protections for defending parties, or for an appellate process, they are highly favorable to local industries. It is likely that MOFTEC’s mere announcement of an investigation will be sufficient to discourage importers of suspect foreign goods.


After its accession to the WTO in 2001, China established its own trade remedy system in order to safeguard its own markets and industries. China now employs a single agency model in the anti-dumping system and uses a prospective methodology for calculating and assessing anti-dumping duties. In using anti-dumping measures and also by implementing WTO rulings, China has continuously improved its practices.


The variety of Chinese goods brought under anti-dumping measures is on the increase. Since the first anti-dumping case against Chinese exports, Chinese goods under anti-dumping investigations vary from labor-intensive products or easily processed products, such as mineral products and chemical products, to textile products, clothing, light industry products, home electric appliances, hardware, chemical products, mineral products, medicine, and farm produce.


Under the Tariff Act of 1930, United States industries may petition the government for relief from imports that are sold in the United States at less than fair value (i.e., “dumped”) or which benefit from subsidies provided through foreign government programs. Under the law, the United States Department of Commerce (“USDC”) determines whether the dumping or subsidizing exists and, if so, the margin of dumping or amount of the subsidy while the United States International Trade Commission (“USITC”) determines whether there is material injury or threat of material injury to the domestic industry by reason of the dumped or subsidized imports.


Chief among those measures is the U.S. antidumping law, which allows domestic manufacturers and unions to request that the government impose special duties on injurious imports allegedly priced below “fair market value” and has been a (deserving) target of criticism here at Cato for more than four decades. Recent economic research has bolstered these criticisms while demonstrating why any legitimate account of U.S.-China trade policy.

Share with friends: