On December 8^th, the Supreme People’s Court convened a hearing in Courtroom No.1 and issued rulings on 10 administrative trademark dispute cases involving former NBA star Michael Jordan, the applicant for retrial, versus the SAIC Trademark Review and Appraisal Board (TRAB), the respondent, and Jordan Sports Co., Ltd, the third party of the first instance. In the three cases relating to “Jordan” trademarks, the Supreme Court clarified the criteria and requirements for the protection of name rights and thereby determined that the registration of the trademark in dispute had damaged the prior name rights in the name “Jordan” enjoyed by the applicant for retrial. Meanwhile, since Jordan Co., Ltd exhibited express bad faith in the registration of the trademark in dispute, the company’s status of operations, its advertising and the use of its enterprise name and related trademarks were insufficient to legitimize the registration of the trademark in dispute.

    Consequently, the court ordered the three “Jordan” trademarks registered by Jordan Co., Ltd. to be cancelled, and it ordered TRAB to issue a new judgment. In the remaining seven cases, the Supreme People’s Court ruled that the applicant for retrial did not enjoy name rights in the Chinese alphabetic spelling of “QIAODAN” or “qiaodan” and thereby rejected the request for retrial. The administrative disputes over the “Jordan” trademarks clarified the standards for the application of the law and struck a reasonable balance between the interests of the retrial applicant and Jordan Co., Ltd.

Via the China Intellectual Property Journal