Using a celebrity’s name or image in a trademark requires the rights holder’s permission and payment of consideration, which is an internationally accepted business practice. If some people are allowed to use the reputation of celebrities to make profits in the market without obtaining authorization through negotiation, it will cause people who abide by the rules to suffer. This is unfair to other competitors and damages the market order. Frankly speaking, Jordan Company's practice of clinging to Jordan's personal reputation has affected the image of the Chinese in the international community. As a Chinese, I really don’t want us to have a national brand like “Jordan”. However, as far as this case itself is concerned, there are also areas worthy of further consideration.

For example, although the judgment declared the disputed "Jordan" trademark invalid on the grounds of infringement of Jordan's right to name, it also pointed out: "This behavior not only damages the natural person's right to name, but also damages the right to name." The legitimate rights and interests of consumers. "Misleading the public and harming the rights and interests of consumers constitutes damage to the interests of the public. For such trademarks, the prohibitive provisions on trademarks with adverse effects in the Trademark Law can be applied and declared invalid. . However, the court previously held that for trademarks that harm private rights, the harm to public interests can no longer be considered. There are certain contradictions between these two statements, which need to be further clarified.

In addition, while the judgment recognized Jordan’s right to the name “Jordan”, it refused to protect its pinyin, which is puzzling. In English that Chinese people are familiar with, "QIAODAN" does not have any meaning. Therefore, apart from treating it as the pinyin of "Jordan", we basically have no other associations with the letter "QIAODAN". In this regard, "QIAODAN" is another expression that can be substituted with "Jordan". In this case, it is necessary to investigate whether "QIAODAN" has a stable corresponding relationship with "Jordan" or basketball star Jordan, and only then can we confirm that "QIAODAN" is equal to "Jordan"?

In any case, the final result of this "Qiaodan" trademark dispute once again demonstrates my country's determination to strengthen judicial protection of intellectual property rights and will effectively promote relevant judicial practices.