Standards Of Identifying Likelihood Of Confusion Between Trademarks

Nowadays, with the growing of the socialist market economy, all kinds of large, medium and small businesses are increasingly focusing on the potential benefits arising from the trademark. But because businesses laid too much emphasis on maximizing the economic benefits, the market competition starts to be deformity, causing malicious trademark infringement. It not only brings bad impacts to corporate reputation, but also causes serious damage to the socialist market economy. Trademark, as an important part of intellectual property, it is throughout people’s daily life, and the business is inextricably linked together. So in judicial practice, recognizing and identifying trademark infringement cases and handling are particularly important. This paper selects three representative cases to study the standards of identifying likelihood of confusion between trademarks, in order to better grasp the theory and practice of trademark infringement issues.The introduction of this paper firstly states market competition today starts to be deformity, due to willful infringement of trademarks. Nowadays trademark infringement cases occur frequently, and mostly have the trademark confusion as the only element of trademark infringement. The new "Trademark Law" added “likelihood of trademarks confusion” as a new element, which is also the most significant elements for judging trademark infringement. This paper proposes there are three criteria to identify likelihood of trademark confusion, namely standard for the similarity of trademark confusion, standard for the differentiation of trademark confusion, and standard for brand awareness of trademark confusion. This article explains the three criteria with representative cases respectively, to analyze the deeper meaning of each standard. Taking the example of Zhejiang and Hubei "rice flower" trademark infringement and dispute case, analyzes standard of the similarity of trademark confusion, and explains the principles of defining similar trademarks, at last states the resolution for this case. Taking the example of trademark infringement case between Zhongce Group and Chaoyang Zhongce Group on the trademark “ChaoYangZhongCe”, and analyzes standard of the differentiation of trademark confusion, and explains the principles of defining differentiated trademarks, and also provides the resolution for this case. Taking the example of trademark "2000" case between Zhao XX and ZongHeng 2000 Company, defines the standard for brand awareness of trademark confusion by analyzing reversed confusions, and reveals the essence of trademark infringement, and provides resolutions for this case as well.Through the analysis of three cases in three chapters, this paper draws a conclusion that there are three main standards to identifying likelihood of confusion between trademarks as described.