The court's judgment shows that bilibili's claim does not meet the standards for the recognition of well-known trademarks. Under the premise that it is difficult to recognize, it is difficult to recognize? Beep? Trademark litigation will inevitably fail. China's laws have strict and detailed standards for well-known trademarks, but bilibili may have some misunderstandings about the standards, thinking that the video industry has already put? Beep? Created a very high reputation, in the eyes of netizens, in fact, bilibili and Bi Li were originally a family. To put it simply, from the perspective of convention, such understanding or cognition is understandable, but after rising to the legal level, there is still a big distance from the standard.

it is always difficult to unify subjective consciousness and objective standards, although? Beep? As a website name, it has a wide audience, but as a trademark, it has not been universally recognized, which is the objective reason why the court did not support bilibili's appeal in the process of accepting the case. As ordinary people, it is not expected that websites that are usually used for leisure and entertainment can be registered as trademarks in other commercial fields, and it is even difficult for someone to put them. Beep? Understanding it as a trademark fully shows that the distance from the specific standards of well-known trademarks is relatively large, and it is not surprising that it is not recognized by the court.

of course, bilibili's negligence in his work is also the main reason for the failure of trademark litigation. As a modern enterprise, it has become a well-known basic cognition that it attaches importance to brand image building and maintenance, and since bilibili has spared no effort to build it? Beep? This brand, the previous trademark registration work will be completed ahead of schedule, and naturally there will be no controversy today. Unfortunately, bilibili did not anticipate the existence of these problems, which led to the painstaking brand being registered as a trademark by other enterprises. From this perspective, it is not difficult to judge that it is difficult to achieve ideal results in bilibili's litigation.

From this, it is not difficult to see that bilibili is right this time. Beep? Trademark litigation is rejected simply because it doesn't meet the standards for the identification of well-known trademarks, so there is naturally no malicious cybersquatting, but the ownership should be determined according to the chronological order of registration. Perhaps bilibili and users don't agree with this result, but in fact, rational analysis will find that most people are right except bilibili's loyal fans. Beep? This trademark has no sense of identity, and the public recognition of well-known trademarks is far more than that. Such a distinct public attitude is the best argument.