Recently, a story about "Li Gui" suing "Li Kui" is being played out in shopping malls and execution grounds.

A dry red wine called "Cabernet" is making many consumers "drunk" and confused. There are more than 30 kinds of wines with the "Cabernet" label on the market. The price of a bottle is generally around 30 yuan, and there are also cheap ones that only cost more than 10 yuan. The price of Changyu Grape Winery Co., Ltd. is much higher. . With the space of choice, those who consume Jiebaina are naturally happy, but the question is who to choose is the best value for money?

While consumers are puzzled, many domestic wine-making giants are very clear-headed, and the dispute over the word "Jiebaina" is intensifying. Changyu Company believes that the "Jiebaina" trademark is the culmination of the hard work of several generations of Changyu people and enjoys high recognition in the minds of consumers. The condensed brand value is a weapon to compete with foreign brands in the high-end market. If such a high-end brand is allowed to be abused as a general name for a variety, it will cause great losses to the Chinese wine industry.

Changyu Company provided a version of the origin of "Jie Baina": as early as the 1930s, Mr. Xu Wangzhi, the president of the Bank of China who was also the manager of Changyu, organized a group of company and bank personnel to study When it came to naming, they decided to adhere to the "integration of Chinese and Western" concept advocated by Zhang Bishi, the founder of Changyu, and named this high-end wine "Cabernet Dry Red", which means "bringing the sea to embrace all rivers". "Cabernet Dry Red" has always been Changyu's core sub-brand with a history of more than 70 years.

However, companies such as Great Wall, Dynasty, and Weilong have different views: "Jiebaina" has now become a general name for a variety. If these three words are unique to Changyu, many other manufacturers It will be greatly affected. They believe that the word "Cabernet" is translated from the French "Cabernet", and "Cabernet" is not unique to Changyu.

Obviously, whether "Cabernet" is a brand or a variety is the focus of conflict between the two parties in the debate. It is understood that there are nearly a thousand grape varieties in our country, but there is no "Cabernet" variety in the officially published list of grape varieties. There is no Cabernet grape variety among the grape varieties. It is difficult to predict what the final outcome of the Cabernet controversy involving many wine-making companies will be.

Some insiders believe that no matter what the outcome, this "three-word dispute" will be the most influential commercial dispute in the history of China's wine industry. The final settlement of the dispute may make the competition in the wine industry even more serious. The pattern has a series of impacts.

Changyu said for the first time that it would participate in the final litigation

This newspaper reported (reporter Liu Jun) that the "first wine case" in China, which had been calmed down - "solution" The battle for the "Baina" trademark has once again triggered a confrontation between leading companies because the Beijing Intermediate People's Court recently sent it back to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (hereinafter referred to as the "Trademark Review and Adjudication Board") for reexamination. Yesterday, Changyu A (000869) (000869), one of the protagonists of the incident, held a media conference and spoke for the first time about "protecting the golden brand of Asian wines."

Changyu is eager to clarify the rumors of trademark withdrawal

“The Cabernet brand is a concentrated expression of Changyu’s original spirit.” Yesterday, Zhou Hongjiang, general manager of Changyu Company, told reporters, he said , I have confidence that the relevant departments will make a fair judgment.

Earlier, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board made a ruling in favor of Changyu, which was opposed by more than 10 companies including Great Wall and Dynasty, and they went to court with Changyu over this. Just after the judgment of the Beijing Intermediate People's Court, the other three plaintiff companies were dissatisfied with the first-instance judgment and drafted an appeal petition to the Beijing Higher People's Court on the 11th.

Zhou Hongjiang said yesterday that the plaintiff's eagerness to appeal highlighted the legality of the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board's decision process. It was a false rumor that the registered trademark "Jiebaina" had been revoked. Changyu would respond as a third party and push the dispute to the final hearing.

In response to Changyu’s statement, the industry alliance where Great Wall Wine belongs yesterday also sent a response to this newspaper. They stated that "Caibana is a public resource in the industry and cannot be monopolized by one company" and pointed out that so far, there is no evidence that "Caibina" has been registered as a trademark.