Article 1: Well-known trademarks as mentioned in this Interpretation refer to trademarks that are well-known to the relevant public in China. Article 2 In the following civil dispute cases, where the parties use the well-known trademark as a factual basis, the people's court shall determine whether the trademark involved is well-known if it deems it necessary based on the specific circumstances of the case:

(1) A trademark infringement lawsuit filed on the grounds of violation of Article 13 of the Trademark Law;

(2) A trademark infringement or unfair lawsuit filed on the grounds that the company name is identical or similar to its well-known trademark Competition litigation;

(3) Litigation that meets the defense or counterclaim stipulated in Article 6 of this Interpretation. Article 3 In the following civil dispute cases, the people's court will not examine whether the trademark involved is well-known:

(1) The alleged infringement of trademark rights or unfair competition does not rely on the fact that the trademark is well-known Based on;

(2) The alleged infringement of trademark rights or unfair competition is not established because it does not meet other requirements stipulated by law.

If the plaintiff files an infringement lawsuit on the ground that the domain name registered and used by the defendant is identical or similar to its registered trademark, and the e-commerce transactions of related goods are conducted through the domain name, it is enough to cause the relevant public to misunderstand, the infringement lawsuit shall be governed by the preceding paragraph. The provisions of item (1) shall be dealt with. Article 4 The people's court shall determine whether a trademark is well-known based on the facts proving its well-known status and comprehensively consider all the factors stipulated in Paragraph 1 of Article 14 of the Trademark Law. However, depending on the specific circumstances of the case, it is not necessary to consider all the factors stipulated in this article. That is, except for circumstances that are sufficient to determine that the trademark is well-known. Article 5 If a party claims that a trademark is well-known, it shall provide the following evidence based on the specific circumstances of the case to prove that its trademark was already well-known when the alleged infringement of trademark rights or unfair competition occurred:

(1) Use The market share, sales area, profit and tax, etc. of the trademark’s goods;

(2) The duration of the trademark’s continued use;

(3) The method of publicity or promotional activities for the trademark , duration, extent, capital investment and geographical scope;

(4) Records that the trademark has been protected as a well-known trademark;

(5) The market reputation enjoyed by the trademark ;

(6) Other facts proving that the trademark is well-known.

The time, scope, method, etc. of use of the trademark involved in the preceding paragraph, including its continued use before registration approval.

For evidence such as the length of time a trademark has been used, industry rankings, market research reports, market value assessment reports, and whether it has ever been recognized as a famous trademark, the people's court should combine it with other evidence to determine that the trademark is well-known, objectively and comprehensively Conduct review. Article 6 If the plaintiff files a civil lawsuit on the ground that the use of the accused trademark infringes upon the exclusive rights of its registered trademark, and the defendant files a defense or counterclaim on the ground that the plaintiff's registered trademark copies, imitates or translates its previously unregistered well-known trademark, it shall The burden of proof is on the fact that its previously unregistered trademark is well-known. Article 7: Before the alleged infringement of trademark rights or unfair competition occurred, the trademark was recognized as well-known by the People's Court or the administrative department. If the defendant does not object to the fact that the trademark is well-known, the People's Court shall confirm it. If the defendant raises an objection, the plaintiff shall still bear the burden of proof of the fact that the trademark is well-known.

Except as otherwise provided in this interpretation, the People's Court does not apply the self-admission rules of evidence in civil litigation to the fact that a trademark is well-known. Article 8: For a trademark that is well-known to the public in China, if the plaintiff has provided basic evidence that the trademark is well-known, or the defendant has no objection, the people's court shall determine the fact that the trademark is well-known. Article 9 It is enough to cause the relevant public to misunderstand the source of the goods using the well-known trademark and the accused trademark, or it is enough to make the relevant public think that there is a specific connection between the operators using the well-known trademark and the accused trademark, such as licensed use, affiliated enterprise relationship, etc. , it falls under the category of “likely to cause confusion” as stipulated in Article 13, Paragraph 2 of the Trademark Law.

If it is enough to make the relevant public think that the accused trademark has a considerable degree of connection with the well-known trademark, thereby weakening the distinctiveness of the well-known trademark, disparaging the market reputation of the well-known trademark, or unfairly exploiting the market reputation of the well-known trademark, It falls under Article 13, Paragraph 3 of the Trademark Law, which “misleads the public, causing the interests of the registrant of the well-known trademark to be potentially damaged.”

Article 10 If the plaintiff requests to prohibit the defendant from using a trademark or business name that is the same as or similar to the plaintiff’s well-known registered trademark on dissimilar goods, the people’s court shall make a ruling based on the specific circumstances of the case and after comprehensive consideration of the following factors:

(1) The degree of prominence of the well-known trademark;

(2) The degree of awareness of the well-known trademark among the relevant public who use the goods with the accused trademark or company name;

(3) The degree of connection between the goods using the well-known trademark and the goods using the accused trademark or company name;

(4) Other relevant factors. Article 11 If the registered trademark used by the defendant violates the provisions of Article 13 of the Trademark Law and copies, imitates or translates the plaintiff's well-known trademark, which constitutes an infringement of trademark rights, the people's court shall, based on the plaintiff's request, make a judgment in accordance with the law to prohibit the defendant from using the trademark. However, if the defendant’s registered trademark has any of the following circumstances, the people’s court will not support the plaintiff’s request:

(1) The time limit for requesting invalidation specified in Article 45, Paragraph 1 of the Trademark Law has expired

(2) When the defendant applied for registration, the plaintiff’s trademark was not well-known.