After 8 years of struggle, ” Cabernet “The case made new progress: The Beijing Intermediate People’s Court judge for a national trademark on the mark re-evaluation committee to determine. Industry experts believe that intellectual property rights in such cases are not isolated cases of the case, such as the honored person prior to the Hainan Lan Tea Case.

Generic name or brand Determine “Cabernet,” whether one of the criteria for registration as a trademark is: “Cabernet” whether it is the common name, whether public resources industry? According to the provisions of trademark law, common name can not be registered as trade marks.

Great Wall prosecution that Cabernet is the French term “Cabernet” translated from a Wine Of a species. Changyu Related to the company stating that, “Cabernet” is the Changyu Company concocted vocabulary, pronunciation similarity can not be “Cabernet” is translated from the basis. Zhang Yugong customs official told reporters, “Cabernet” is a 1931 Renzhang Yu Wang Xu, general manager of the Company’s “Chinese and Western fusion,” “carrying, contains all” concept to get inspiration.

Registered trademark of why “is common”

Although Changyu said, “Cabernet,” the property of their special, but the market labeled “Cabernet” grapes Wine Everywhere. Changyu, said general manager Zhou Hongjiang, according to “Trademark Law” 52,53,54 provides some production now labeled “Cabernet” on the product is infringing. “We all know, has now entered the judicial process, how can we do?”

8 years why the fight game

Fighting for “Cabernet,” the name behind the huge interest of the industry. Insiders said, “Cabernet” on Sell 3 billion, the manufacturer has put its promotional costs, once registered by Changyu successful, then re-train the new brand will be no small cost.

Zhangyu general manager Zhou Hongjiang that, once the “Cabernet” not as a trademark of Changyu, the impact on the Changyu is enormous. “Because there are well-known among consumers, now have foreign grapes Wine Cabernet business use, this is sad. “

“Cabernet” trademark or revoked

Hainan University School of Law Associate Professor Zhang Lina that the law is to safeguard the public interest as the starting point, to protect private rights, it is necessary to protect the public interest as the premise, which is the core of the intellectual property system. If Changyu successful “Cabernet” trademark, other companies are only two ways: First, stop using the “Cabernet” name, which means that these companies early on, “Cabernet” propaganda put all in vain; 2 other companies pay to the Changyu, which will increase certain expenditures of these enterprises. In addition, if Changyu monopoly “Cabernet” or will cause the price high.

Therefore, Zhang Lina that the outcome of the case may be, “Cabernet” trademark has been canceled, and degradation for the common name. Zhang Lina said, intellectual property rights in such cases are not isolated cases of the case. If the case before the Hainan Lan and elegant tea, “Lan honored person” is an enterprise registered trademark of Hainan, was also used to name the other companies to court. Lastly, the Court held “blue and elegant” is the common name, trademark has been canceled.