Trademark Registrability Study For Generic Name

Generic names are one of the important systems of trademark law,and they play a pivotal role in trademark registration and trademark infringement cases.The innovations of this paper are Inspired by the dispute over the registration of the trademark BOOKING.COM in the United States,and this article divides signs related to generic names into “single generic names”,“combinations of generic names and signs lacking in distinctiveness”,and“combinations of generic names and signs of low distinctiveness”.This article also takes the legal provisions and judicial practice into consideration to sort out the registrability determination of generic names in China,identify the problems,and draw on the experience of the United States in the determination of generic names to propose a specific solution suitable for China’s national conditions.Apart from the introduction and conclusion,the paper is divided into five chapters.Chapter 1 provides a general discussion on generic names and elaborates the connotation of generic names through the relationship between distinctiveness and generic names;according to the legal provisions and doctrinal classification,generic names are divided into legal generic names,agreed common names and initial generic names and acquired generic names;according to the changes of generic names in successive amendments to the law,the reasons for the changes in generic name regulations are elaborated in the light of the social background at that time;according to the legal provisions and in the light of judicial practice,the conditions for the recognition of generic names are summarized and the necessity for the relevant public,including operators in the same industry,is elaborated.Chapter 2 classifies generic type marks into three categories: “single generic name”,“combination of generic name and sign lacking distinctiveness”,and “combination of generic name and sign of low prominence”,and examines the registrability of generic type marks in China in the light of judicial practice and legal provisions,including the prominence of each type of mark and the conditions for obtaining prominence,and limits the relevant public for obtaining prominence to relevant consumers,and elaborates on the public interest attributes perceived by operators in the same industry.Chapter 3 elaborates on the public interest issues involved in the registration of generic name type marks,while presenting four problems in the determination of the registrability of generic name type marks,mainly due to the legal provisions and the application of judicial practice,which arise due to a lack of understanding of generic names and distinctiveness.Chapter 4 focuses on the identification criteria and specific application of generic names in the United States,highlighting the establishment of the primary significance test and its application in the BOOKING.COM case,as well as the consumer-focused evidence system in the United States and the path to registration of generic name type marks.Chapter 5 proposes solutions to the specific problems in Chapter 3 on the basis of the U.S.experience.Clarify the meaning of generic name itself and solve the irregularity of generic name determination in judicial practice;clarify the definition of relevant market and limit the scope of application of relevant market fixing;seize the core positioning of consumers in registrability determination,limit the scope of legal generic name,and establish the primary significance test and consumer evidence system in registrability determination.