The Theory Of Application To Trademark Reverse Confusion

After the introduction of reverse confusion theory in the United States,with the frequent occurrence of reverse confusion infringements in cases in recent years,it has aroused extensive discussion and research in academic circles.The main feature of reverse obfuscation is that the latter users are stronger than the prior rights holders and do not have the purpose of clinging to the reputation of the former,and the direction of misunderstanding by the relevant public is opposite to the general confusion.The latter’s reverse obfuscation infringement may inhibit and swallow up the survival and development space of the prior right holder,and eventually take the disputed trademark as his own.Various circles have different views on this theory.Analyzing the relationship between confusion and reverse confusion in theoretical and practical cases,disputes in the case,etc.,it is concluded that there are many factors for determining confusion: similar goods and services;similar trademarks;whether they belong to trademark use,and so on.The main difference between reverse obfuscation and general obfuscation lies in the different status of the parties in dispute and the different directions in which the relevant public misunderstands.In practice,there are a small number of judicial organs that talk about reverse confusion,and they mainly invoke the confusion clause that infringes on registered trademark rights to regulate.The main reason for the court’s judgment on “reverse confusion” by the “confusion” statute is that there is no clear legal basis for reverse confusion.According to the existing “confusion” clauses,the judgement of confusion and trademark infringement are used to evaluate reverse confusion.It can be established,but the argumentation and determination are complicated and controversial.Through the analysis of the case,the main regulatory paths and conclusions are drawn through analysis: 1.In the absence of a clear legal basis,reverse obfuscation can be regulated in accordance with the current law on obfuscation;2.Learning from the Supreme People’s Court’s retrial of Wang Lao Ji Jia Duo Bao.The concept in the case can be judged as "common use" for the disputed trademark.Reverse obfuscation-related cases are highly controversial,with a high rate of appeal,and repeated judgments.Many cases are appealed to the Supreme Court to cause retrials.The case judgement cannot really resolve disputes and disputes between the parties,making trademark rights in an unstable state,and affecting the interests of the parties,consumers,and market order.Therefore,we can learn from the above-mentioned Supreme Law’s judgment that both parties “share” the dispute mark,and determine that the disputing party should use it jointly in cases involving disputes related to trademark rights,so that they can share common benefits.This is a viable model that can achieve a win-win situation such as saving judicial resources,optimizing corporate benefits,and stabilizing market order.It also has legal support.Based on the prospect of the future,if the application frequency of reverse obfuscation in practice is high and the argumentation is cumbersome,it is necessary to clearly enter the law in order to improve judicial efficiency.In the future,the law enforcement concepts of administrative agencies and the formation of corresponding mechanisms will also help to avoid the frequent occurrence of reverse confusion infringement problems.