An article written by Kenji Sarukura and Kohei Tsuji was published in “Intellectual Property Management” magazine.

“[China] Case of Name Right Infringement by Manolo Blahnik’s Trademark Registration”

Japan Intellectual Property Association
Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 73, No. 4

1. Introduction
2. Overview of the case
3. Ruling of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board that led to the judgment and outline of the lower court judgment
　3.1. At the stage of application for registration of the trademark
　3.2. At the stage of request for annulment of the trademark
4. Contents and significance of the judgment (retrial judgment of the Supreme People’s Court)
　4.1. Contents of the judgment
　4.2. Significance of the judgment
5. Analysis of the judgment
　5.1. Prohibition of double jeopardy
　5.2. Infringement of name right
　5.3. Comparison with past judicial precedents
6. Measures against misappropriated application based on the judgment
　6.1. Measures to take at normal times (before the occurrence of a dispute)
　6.2. Measures to take in times of need (after the occurrence of a dispute)
7. Conclusion

Misappropriated applications for trademark registration in China have been a long-standing issue for major brands and prominent figures. In the judgment discussed in this article, the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China ruled, as general requirements, that infringement of a name right is found when the relevant public of China recognizes that the trademark in dispute indicates a specific individual and the products bearing such trademark have the permission of the said individual or it is easy to acknowledge that such products have a certain connection with the said individual, and then held that if the applicant for the trademark in dispute evidently has ill intent, the said requirements shall be relaxed and an infringement of a name right is found when the applicant is aware of the individual’s name recognition (either within or outside the country). Regarding misappropriated applications for trademark registration concerning foreign prominent figures, there is a judgment of the Supreme People’s Court in 2020 (the so-called Michael Jordan Case).  However, the judgment discussed in this article is significant in that it enhanced protection of foreign major brands and prominent figures by relaxing the requirements for finding an infringement of a name right when the applicant evidently has ill intent.