• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.69
• /
• pp.699-720
• /
• 2016

In the past 10 years, there have been lots of misuses of the trademark system in China. For example, some Chinese companies have registered same or similar oversea's well-known trademark as a prior rights holder, and oversea's companies lost a chance to register their own trademarks or commence cases to acquire their own trademark determination in China. So Chinese government revised Chinese Trademark Law in 2014 to remedy these mistakes. Article 30 is intended to crack down on preemptive registration and compensate for the possible unfair consequences resulted from the principle of prior registration. Under the principle of prior registration, only where the unregistered trademarks of prior use have certain influence, and where the applicant of latter applied trademark knows or should know the prior trademark and the applicant has the bad faith of obtaining unjustified interests from goodwill of such unregistered marks, it shall be curbed by Article 30. Furthermore, trademark oppositions could be filed by anybody previously. Under the revised Trademark Law Article 44, oppositions based on absolute grounds can still be filed by anyone, but oppositions based on other available grounds can only be filed by a prior rights holder or a materially-interested party with undefined but similar to the standing requirement for filing nullities under Article 41 of the old law, and likely intended to cover trademark licensees and successors.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.73
• /
• pp.1-20
• /
• 2017

There are many safeguards and measures available regulating the protection of a trademark and its registered holder, however, the protection of a licensee in a trademark license agreement is also important for protection of a intellectual property. Therefore, there are several measures in place for the protection of licensees' interests in Chinese trademark law. Article 43(3) of the Chinese Trademark Law rules a licensor who licenses others to use his registered trademark shall submit the trademark licensing to the trademark office for file, and the trademark office shall announce the trademark licensing to public. Without filing, the trademark licensing shall not be used against a bona fide third party. It means a licensee can not use an unrecorded license with the relevant trademark authority against third parties - essentially, this means that a licensee should insist on having their trademark license agreements recorded against the relevant trademark authority, so that a licensee's interests are protected as against the assignees, licensees and other types of third parties. Otherwise a third party in good faith can use the registered trademark legally against a licensee even though a trademark license agreement between a licensor and licensee is still valid.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.157-176
• /
• 2016

This study is to investigate Trademark Prior Use Defence of prior use party under Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China. Chinese Trademark Law was amended for the third time and this Law shall enter into force on 1 May 2014. This third amendment introduced Prior Use Defence Right of Trademark for the first time. Article 59(3) gives the right to the prior use party for the continuous use of such trademark under the condition that first, an identical or similar trademark has been used in connection with the same goods or similar goods by others before the registrant's application, second, such trademark should have a certain influence in certain market, and third, such aforesaid trademark should be used within the original scope continuously. Then the exclusive right holder of said registered trademark shall have no right to prohibit others from continuous use of such trademark. Korean companies should be aware that it is almost impossible to search prior use trademark before a dispute arises, since the prior use trademark has never been registered. The best way to control the prior use trademark is to superintend aforesaid trademark for the use within the original scope.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.67
• /
• pp.49-68
• /
• 2015

In recent years in China, corresponding to a shift in consumption pattern from household basics to greater expenditure on quality of life, new franchising opportunities arise. Although the franchising prospect in China is promising, Korean companies aiming at franchising into China need to be aware of the legal framework for commercial franchise in China as this will have direct impact on their business expansion. Where franchising activities involve trade mark licence, Chinese Franchise Regulations require such trade mark licence agreement to be regulated in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Chinese Trademark Law. Furthermore where one party fails to perform his obligation and it impacts purpose of the contract seriously, the other party could avoid the contract in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Chinese Contract Law. To launch franchising business successfully in China, Korean companies do market research sufficiently before they may commence franchise business. Korean franchisor must register with local authorities in China by own name, and make Chinese partner take charge of management of the distribution network and invitation of franchisee partners.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.41 no.1
• /
• pp.21-39
• /
• 2016

The problems of parallel import in China have been becoming hot issues day by day, because the brand name goods' price in China is much higher than in other developed countries. This study researched the parallel import's basic theories and law cases, and analyzed the legal matters of Chinese parallel import system. First of all, China hasn't any law on parallel import so far. So the court judges determined the law cases based on 「patent law」, 「trademark law」 or 「anti-unfair competition law」. Therefore even in the same case, there might be different decisions according to judges or applied laws. This study handled three different law cases on the parallel import. We found some problems of Chinese parallel import system, so our conclusion is that to solve those kinds of problems, China should legislate the new parallel import law as soon as possible.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.42 no.3
• /
• pp.123-142
• /
• 2017

This study is to investigate Right to Chinese Name for Foreigners under Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China. The basketball star Michael Jordan sued Qiaodan Sports in 2012, saying the company had built its business around his Chinese name read as Qiaodan in Chinese without his permission. The Chinese supreme court ruled that the trademark for Jordan's Chinese name should be returned to China's State Administration for Industry and Commerce to be re-awarded, and it means Qiaodan Sports Co. must stop using the Chinese characters for Qiaodan on its merchandise. However, the court rejected Jordan's claim to the romanized or pinyin form of the name "Qiaodan," saying in its judgment that this version may not be closely linked with him. People who want to claim the right to Chinese name, he/she must prove the specific name has linked with him/her. Furthermore, he/she must prove the Chinese firm's actions had displayed "malicious intent" by registering trademarks for his/her Chinese name. The courts approve infringement by Chinese firm and stop to use his/her name in the country.