Conflicts And The Solution Between Trademarks Of Geographical Names And Geographical Indications

China has vast territory and abundant resources. With an increase in foreign exchanges as well as more emphasis on the intellectual property, the importance of geographical indications is highlighted. As a result of a lack of corresponding legislation about geographical indications for a long time, amounts of geographical name trademarks appear and lead to a conflict between geographical name trademarks and geographical indications. In addition, two parallel administrative organs are authorized to identify and to approve geographical indications, what makes the contradiction deepened. This article , mainly from aspects of the performance, the causes and the resolution, analyzes the related issues of the conflict between geographical name trademarks and geographical indications and proposes corresponding suggestion for improvements.The first part of this article analyzes the trademark infringement case 'Baipu yellow rice wine' and the case 'Maotai spirits'. In the case 'Baipu yellow rice wine' ,the plaintiff who owns exclusive rights to the geographical name trademark 'Baipu' complained that the defendant infringed its trademark rights by using 'Baipu' strikingly on the same yellow rice wine products. The court identified that yellow rice wine was a specialty of Baipu town and had a long history, so the defendant acknowledging 'Baipu' on its products belonged to a legitimate use. The facts identified by the court can tell us that the 'Baipu rice wine', which essentially is a geographical indication, not only indicates specific quality and reputation of the product, but also manifests its origin. This case involves the legitimate use in certification mark system and the relation between geographical name trademarks and geographical indications. While in the case 'Maotai spirits', 'Maotai 'spirits has been protected as a product from original sources(presently called the Geographical Indications Products )by AQSIQ (the General Administration Quantity Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine) ,what leads to the right conflict between the register of geographical name trademark 'Maotai' and the users of geographical indications. This case focuses on the reality of management mode confusion for geographical indications.After the second part elaborates the concept and the characteristic of geographical indications, and analyzes similarities and differences between geographical name trademarks and geographical indications, the third part and the fourth one following immediately the problems raised in the first part, describe and analyze causes and solution of the conflict. First of all, "Trademark law" creates the conflict. Before "Trademark law" was revised in 1993, it was common to register geographical name trademarks for the lack of related regulation, what made potential risks of a conflict with geographical indications to geographical name trademarks. At present, "Trademark law" has still left behind a big space for the geographical name to be registered as a trademark. In addition, there are two management modes that exist in China. One is that the Trademark Office of SAIC(the State Administration of Industry and Commerce),according to the trademark legal system, absorbs geographical indications into the certification mark and collective trademark protection system. The other is that AQSIQ (the General Administration Quantity Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine) provides 'Provisions on the Geographical Indications Products'. The collision of administration authorities ,to a certain extent, deepens the conflict between geographical name trademarks and geographical indications. After putting forward a concrete suggestion for the conflict, the fourth part elaborates the reason why the trademark legal system should be adopted as the only management mode, followed by an analysis of the existing trademark legal system's inadequacy and recommendations for further improvements.