The Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court issued the first-instance verdict on the name rights dispute case brought by former American professional basketball player Michael Jordan against Jordan Sports Company and Bairen Trading Company.

Plaintiff Michael Jordan claimed that since 1984, China's major media outlets have reported on the plaintiff for decades, using the Chinese translation "Jordan" to refer to the plaintiff, so "Jordan" This translated name has established a specific connection with the plaintiff and is well-known to the Chinese public. The plaintiff thus enjoys the right to the name of the Chinese word "Jordan". The defendant, Jordan Sports Company, used the plaintiff's name "Jordan" in its trade name, products and commercial promotion activities without the plaintiff's permission, which misled consumers and constituted an infringement of the plaintiff's right to name. Bairen Trading Company sells Jordan Sports Company's infringing products, thus constituting concurrent infringement.

The two defendants *** both argued that Jordan is just a common surname in British and American countries. It is impossible for the plaintiff to enjoy the name rights in the Chinese legal sense to the customary translation of a common British and American surname. The defendant has registered and used the "Jordan" trademark for decades, and enjoys trademark rights to the "Jordan" trademark in accordance with the law. The plaintiff had known for a long time that the defendant was using the "Jordan" trademark and trade name, but did not claim the rights in time, and the statute of limitations had already expired. The products sold by Bairen Trading Company are all purchased through legal channels, so it has fulfilled its reasonable duty of care and does not constitute copyright infringement.

After trial, the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court held that Jordan Sports Company, knowing that Michael Jordan had a high reputation, still chose the word "Jordan" for trademark registration without authorization, and registered "Jordan" ?Business name. In addition, Jordan Sports also registered Michael Jordan's former jersey number, 23, and the Chinese translations of his two sons, Marcus Jordan and Jeffrey Jordan, as trademarks. It was determined that it had the intention to cause or allow the public to confuse, so Jordan Sports Company constituted an infringement of the plaintiff's right to name.

Finally, the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People's Court ruled in accordance with the law that Jordan Sports Company should publicly apologize to Jordan in newspapers and on the Internet, and clarify the relationship between the two. Jordan Sports Company stopped using the "Jordan" trade name in its corporate name. Jordan Sports Company should stop using the trademark involving "Jordan", but for trademarks involving "Jordan" that have exceeded the five-year dispute period, reasonable methods including distinctive logos should be used to indicate that it is related to the former American basketball player Michael ?There is no connection to Jordan. Since the plaintiff made it clear in this case that it did not claim economic losses, the court only made a ruling on the plaintiff’s claim for mental damages solatium and reasonable expenses in the lawsuit. Jordan Sports Company should compensate the plaintiff RMB 300,000 in solatium for mental damage. Jordan Sports Company compensated the plaintiff for the reasonable expenses of RMB 50,000 incurred in this lawsuit; it rejected the plaintiff’s other claims.