Identification And Protection Of Specific Name Of Famous Commodity

As an intangible asset of enterprise, old brand often contains enormouscommercial value. In order to improve the competitiveness of products,expand sales, firms will be honored in the name of the enterprise, the name ofgoods or for the use of trademark. As an important mark,the name ofcommodity,will be of great help to distinguish the goods or services, to buildbrand, promote product. As a result, Many operators use the specific name ofthe well-known commodity to obtain interests. However, this ride, not onlyharm the interests of the people who have the right of names of famouscommodities, even destroy the order of the market. Although the "Anti UnfairCompetition Law" and "trademark law" and relevant laws and regulationsprovide the rules on the protection of famous product specific name,packagingand decoration, due to defects in the legal system, counterfeit, fakephenomenon occurs repeatedly. This also brings many disputes and litigationdelay for a long time.In view of this, the author attempts to analyze the "clay figurineZhang"unfair competition case, review the legal system of protection ofspecific name of famous product,and in the reflection of the short comings ofthe system, learn from foreign legislative experience, propose reasonablesuggestions to reduce litigation and improve the legal system for the protectionof specific names of famous goods. In addition to the introduction andconclusion, this paper is divided into three parts. The first part mainlyintroduces the anti unfair competition case of "clay figurine Zhang",summarizes the retrial verdicts and reasons of the first and second trial, andsummarizes the focus of controversy in the case. The second part focuseson the focus of controversy, combes the legal system for the protection ofspecific name of famous product, through the identification of specific namesof famous goods and the same or similar problems and confusion and theapplying of principle of judicial balance, put forward the opinion on the treatment of this case. The fifth part put forward a sound proposal about thelegal system of the case exposed, such as,the scope of well-knowncommodity protection is too narrow, the legislative level is not high,the law isnot clear. In a word, the current judicial practice in China, identification ofspecific names of famous commodities are still fuzzy, random, I hope that thisarticle will provide some help to solve the related cases, and put forward myviews to further improve the relevant laws and regulations.