Learning from the Beijing RedBull Trademark Dispute
Learning from the Beijing RedBull Trademark Dispute Last year, the decision of the Supreme People's Court of China has caught a lot of attention whereby it dismissed the appeal of Beijing RedBull and upheld the decision rendered by the Beijing Higher People's Court that the Thailand T.C. Pharmaceuticals Industries Co. Ltd. has complete ownership of the "RedBull" trademark. The dispute...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Learning from the Beijing RedBull Trademark Dispute
Last year, the decision of the Supreme People's Court of China has caught a lot of attention whereby it dismissed the appeal of Beijing RedBull and upheld the decision rendered by the Beijing Higher People's Court that the Thailand T.C. Pharmaceuticals Industries Co. Ltd. has complete ownership of the "RedBull" trademark.
The dispute was concerning the "RedBull" trademark registration in China. The case was filed by the Beijing RedBull where it claims compensation of RMB 3.753 billion Yuan in advertising expenses. While facing the loss from the Beijing Higher People's Court which dismisses all the claims, the plaintiff appealed to the Supreme People's Court of China which affirmed the Higher Court decision. Why this case caught a lot of attention is because of the huge compensation being claimed which was RMB 3.753 billion (USD 577 million) along with the Court fees of RMB 18.8 million (USD2.89 million).
As per the Chinese Trademark Law, using the registered trademark without obtaining the license or using the mark which is identical with another mark being registered and that is used for the same goods and services will result in confusing the mind of the consumer. The mark which is used can be similar or identical with that registered trademark which will likely cause confusion and will constitute infringement. Probably, the identical trademark can exist if used for other goods or services. But in case, if the mark is a well-known mark, which can be any wordmark or logo, it will not be suggested to use the mark even for dissimilar goods.
For using any such registered mark, it is imperative to have a strong contractual commitment and obligation for each party which specifies the involvement of the trademark and its use for different purposes. RedBull case is a foremost example where such usage of the mark must be restricted, ensuring that the mark does not cause any such confusion to the consumers. In the case of a well-known mark, a more cautious approach must be taken and the corporation must refrain from using the mark.
