Tag Archives: Struggle
Cabernet Trademark Struggle: “li Gui,” Notice “li Kui” A New Story
Wine ” Cabernet “Trademark dispute, fighting for nearly 8 years, playing complicated and confusing, many of the details, so the law, too professional, and also so long ago?? Has been pulled out of 70 years.
Recently that this naughty, quite large, I spent a bit more energy to study, study finally clear. It does not matter is not clear, a clear, also found that this is a big century, comparable to widely spread under the Water Margin “Li Gui,” posing “Li Kui.” But, then Li Gui only willing to secretly haunted, but today’s “Li Gui,” you can jump to the stage to the “Li Kui” “try sky high.” This is precisely what I want it to?? Fun.
This matter did not complex: 70 years ago, Changyu Grape Wine Factory invented a unique grape taste Wine , Named “Cabernet”, exclusive of 60 years; and several registered trademarks, still quite brand protection awareness. Until 10 years ago, the Great Wall Winery began producing wine, what name? Feel that “Cabernet” Yes, well-known in the market, also with it. With the use of the Changyu Winery quit, not to use the; the Great Wall were not done, refused to quit, have been common, and you should let it confiscated for “Cabernet,” a common name ah … …
Sounds ridiculous, in fact, that simple.
However, I still want to pursue this simple behind the “simple”?? Why the veritable “Li Gui,” can be reported to the palace, “Li Kui”?
In fact, this is a historical origin. 70 years ago, I believe Changyu is registered, “Cabernet” trademark?? Please you to check information on the proceedings, it can always find some clues. 60 years ago, the liberation, all in the past to re-register a trademark of All?? Attention, re-registration, is Honored They can take home the old trademark, the trademark is not all “confiscated” the.
Zhangyu business originally private company, be regarded as trials to 50 years starting from the last century three separate occasions to the State Trademark Bureau “Cabernet” trademark applications for registration, until this century in 2002, finally got my trademark. This is what could be in trouble, then there are the Great Wall were also dozens of wineries were using “Cabernet”, so re-registered successfully Changyu, Great Wall, which means they can not use the “Cabernet,” the trademark the. Great Wall have indiscriminate investments in droves to protest, “above” this registration will soon be dismissed; the withdrawal, Changyu and certainly not dry, but also to protest, this protest is 6 years, in 2008, Changyu finally has triumphed; the Great Wall were not done, the appeal to the court, the judges state business. The court held that the Great Wall to provide a lot of new evidence that “Cabernet” is not Zhangyu family, Changyu has provided much new evidence, that “Cabernet” from “ancient times” is “our house”, and then forget it, simply go to the judges or by the business, “BIA” it … …
Something so simple? Really that simple! If you think this story is complicated, so I resort to a metaphor we are most familiar. A 70-year old one, the times they change, to the chaos of the times, old one of “being” admitted to many people, it was discovered after the old house by the door, hall door, back door, was a most convenient diameter, so We will from this way through the aisle. Then again, old one, and the younger generation that this house is our house, and you walk around, I is not convenient ah, so that it will close the path to be the neighborhood are anxious, I step on the road more than a dozen years, and on what basis that this road is your home, ah! Take your real estate license then come! Year’s real estate license to find out, but not useful?? Liberation of real estate license is not a comprehensive and balanced Moreover, this route can not walk, can not live in the old house, this is not the loss of everyone’s interests? ?? That it is time everyone?? It “universal” it!
Result, “Li Gui” were on the downtown court.
I would like to venture to ask is, if your home quickly moved into the old one because some people would be asked to forfeiture, would you like? Reasonable and unreasonable? If the answer is no, Is Changyu’s “Cabernet” on the forfeiture? On the “universal”?
Disengagement of these disputes, I think that this thing, regardless of outcome, are tragic.
“cabernet” Struggle: Legal Woes Have Not Yet Solved
Called China “the first intellectual property case of wine” and “Cabernet trademark case”, after several twists and turns, has again become the focus of public concern.
HC food industry network After several twists and turns of “Cabernet trademark case”, recently became the focus of wide concern. December 30, 2009, the Beijing First Intermediate People made a first instance verdict. The court held that, because the plaintiff and the third presented in the proceedings, a large number of decisions that may affect the outcome of the case upon the evidence, if not be taken into account is not conducive to the protection of legitimate rights of the parties, in particular, is likely to harm the public interest, therefore, Therefore, quashing the defendant Trademark Review Commission ruled No. 05115, in considering new evidence submitted by the parties based on the re-determination.
Then, the media reported that “‘Cabernet’ Department of Industry of public resources”, “highly Wine Industry concerned with intellectual property disputes Preliminary Conclusions. “Thing is it? China University of Political Science Research Center, deputy director of the Intellectual Property Intellectual accept the China Intellectual Property News in an interview, said: first-instance ruling only requires Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to re-found” COFCO Great Wall trademark dispute raised by the request, “the two sides are not directly determine who wins trademark dispute, the case proceedings have yet to go, now,” Cabernet “trade mark registration will not be the legal effect of any change.
From “Cabernet” applications for trademark registration was to be registered, deregistered, to maintain the register, after review, to the court and therefore the court ruling requires the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to re-found, from administration to administration of justice, and now from justice has returned to administrative procedures. After more than 7 years already, “Cabernet” trademark dispute about who is the final winner, appears to need a very long process.
Long trademark dispute Event had to from 8 years ago. May 2001, Yantai Changyu SAIC Group Limited to the Trademark Office, “Cabernet” trademark application for registration. The Trademark Office shall be published after the initial approval of, the legal objections raised no objections during the period, the Trademark Office on April 2002 to be approved for registration, trademark registration No. No. No. 1,748,888, the designated protection products, including wine, brandy, shochu and other , exclusive period to April 2012.
This caused manufacturers COFCO Great Wall Wine opposition. July 10, 2002, the Trademark Office to trademark Caesar (2002) 187 “on the removal of section No. 1,748,888,” Cabernet “registered trademark of the decision,” saying “Cabernet” is a red wine Raw material Species name, the registered trademark shall be revoked. At the same time, the Great Wall, Veyron, several dynasties such as wine production enterprises with “Cabernet” is a wine generic name, is the main raw material for brewing wine, ground joint to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to submit the application, sought to withdraw ” Cabernet “trademark.
For the Trademark Office to revoke the decision, Changyu Inc. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to review a request, at the same time, the controversy over the Great Wall and other companies to apply for accreditation committee is also pending. May 26, 2008, Trademark Review and Adjudication Board, after repeated tests, and after many rounds of evaluation were removed and Trademark Office has made the first decision of the BIA 187 words (2008) No. 05143 decision and dismissed the Great Wall and other units of the revocation request BIA words (2008) No. 05115 No. trademark dispute ruling, the maintenance of Changyu wine in class 33 ( Beverages ) And other goods on the first registration No. 1748888, “Cabernet” trademark. Decision No. 05,143 of which have become legally effective. Currently, “Cabernet” remain valid trademarks registered trademark. Disobeys Trademark Review and Adjudication Board
ruling, in June 2008, the grain Wine Company, Valence (the company in case of withdrawal of the prosecution during the trial), Dynasty company, Great Wall to Beijing in the hospital for a proposed administrative proceedings. October 2008, two public court hearing of the case, and after a more than a year, which was recently made a first instance verdict.
Court of First Instance against the decision, COFCO Wines & Spirits Inc. Proxy People, Beijing Jincheng Law Firm Law Hong Song of the reporter said that the current inconvenience comments.