• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patentanwaltskanzlei

Patentanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees‘ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Walter Benjamin Feldheim
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

Myth of Evidence in Chinese Trademark Cases

14. June 2016

Gloria Q. Wu, our valued colleague from Kangxin wrote an article about the myth of evidence in Chinese trademark cases. Get to know the facts behind this myth and learn more about Trademarks in China.

Many brand owners experienced the disappointment of receiving a decision of opposition or invalidation or litigation, telling you that your case is not supported because of insufficient evidence for your claimed facts. When realizing how many pages of evidence already have been submitted to the TMO or TRAB or the Court, it gets even harder to understand the decision.

For many, especially foreign brand owners the sufficiency of evidence is a myth. The differences to foreign processes consist amongst others of the specific types of evidence as well as the formality of documents.

Trademark cases in China mostly need evidence in some of the following groups: trademark use, trademark reputation, bad faith, business relationship, similarity of trademarks and similarity of goods/services as well as copyright.

You can read some more details below:

sherlock-holmes-search-myth-evidence

Trademark Use

This evidence is one of the most used in trademark cases such as opposition of invalidation based on the ground of prior use and reputation over the same/similar goods/services, or the ground of well-known trademark.

The following types of evidence either independently or in combination with others can prove the trademark use:

  • Sales contract, purchase order or invoice showing the goods or services using the trademark is sold to China mainland during the prescribed time period. It should not be electronical and in best case stamped by the Chinese counterpart.
  • Customs declaration form showing the goods using the trademark are imported to China. Such form should be stamped with the official seal of the Customs;
  • Audit report showing the sales amount of the goods/services using the trademark in China mainland.
  • Shop/office lease agreement showing the venue of sales of goods/services using the trademark in China mainland;
  • Company brochure, product catalogue, and other promotional material. Should only be used in combination with others.

Trademark Reputation

A trademark’s reputation is an important part of opposition in invalidation or litigation, because of prior use and reputation over the same/ similar goods/services or of well-known trademark, trademark infringement litigation and unfair competition litigation.

It is important to remember that trademark reputation is only the result or reaction from relevant public – not be mistaken with trademark use. The following types of evidence either independently or in combination with others can prove the trademark reputation:

  • Search report from China National Library which is a formal report and considered as a strong evidence.
  • Notarized webpage. The notarized printing is deemed more reliable because the online version can be changed easily
  • Awards & honor related to the trademark in China mainland, either issued by the government, association of the industry or the media. However, it might be rare for foreign brand owners to receive awards and honors in China;
  • Survey report issued by a professional investigation company, showing that the relevant public in China is familiar with the trademark.

Read more about the myth of evidence in the full article.

Do you have questions left according the evidence of your trademark in China?

We will be happy to help you with any concerns. Don’t hesitate to contact us.

CAT-call_en

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 

Category iconTrademark Law Tag iconChina,  Chinese,  Trademark

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Trademark Law

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law

Recent Posts

  • What is the public allowed to know? 3. June 2024
  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

3. June 2024
What is the public allowed to know?

What is the public allowed to know?

4. March 2022
Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

25. February 2022
CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks?

CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks?

24. February 2022
EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible

EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible

21. February 2022
CFI: Pumpkin seed oil + PGI symbol

CFI: Pumpkin seed oil + PGI symbol

15. February 2022
SPOTIFY v POTIFY – a ‘pot’ app

SPOTIFY v POTIFY – a ‘pot’ app

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Hanauer Landstrasse 287
D – 60314 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

Newsletter INT

© Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf INT

Please note: If we deal specifically with your individual case, this is what is known as an initial consultation. In accordance with Section 34 of the Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz, this incurs one-off costs of 190 euros plus MwSt. We will be happy to assist you in a personal consultation after our telephone call.

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf

Um dieses Angebot nutzen zu können, müssen Sie der Speicherung Ihrer personenbezogenen Daten zustimmen. Wir behandeln diese streng vertraulich und verwenden sie nur zur Kontaktaufnahme mit Ihnen. Mehr dazu lesen Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.

Bitte beachten Sie: Wenn wir uns konkret mit Ihrem Einzelfall befassen, ist dies eine sogenannte Erstberatung. Für eine solche entstehen gemäß § 34 Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz einmalige Kosten in Höhe von 190 Euro plus MwSt. Gerne helfen wir Ihnen im Anschluss an unser Telefonat in einem persönlichen Beratungsgespräch weiter.