For goods that are fixed in the relevant market due to historical traditions, customs, geographical environment and other reasons, the people's court may determine the common name in the relevant market as a common name. If the applicant for the trademark in dispute knew or should have known that the trademark he applied for registration was a commodity name that was customary in some regions, the people's court may treat the trademark he applied for registration as a common name.

When the People's Court examines and determines whether the disputed trademark is a generic name, it generally shall be based on the factual status on the date of trademark application. If the factual status changes when registration is approved, whether it is a common name shall be judged based on the factual status at the time of registration approval. Article 11 If a trademark sign only or mainly describes or explains the quality, main raw materials, functions, uses, weight, quantity, origin, etc. of the goods used, the People's Court shall determine that it falls under Article 11, Paragraph 1 of the Trademark Law. The circumstances specified in item (2). If a trademark mark or its constituent elements imply the characteristics of the goods but does not affect its function of identifying the source of the goods, it does not fall under the circumstances specified in this item. Article 12 If a party claims that the trademark in dispute constitutes a copy, imitation or translation of its unregistered well-known trademark and should not be registered or invalidated in accordance with Paragraph 2 of Article 13 of the Trademark Law, the people's court shall comprehensively consider the following: Factors and the interaction between factors are determined to determine whether confusion is likely to occur:

(1) The degree of similarity of the trademark mark;

(2) The degree of similarity of the goods;

(3) The distinctiveness and popularity of the trademark requested for protection;

(4) The degree of attention of the relevant public;

(5) Other relevant factors.

The subjective intention of the trademark applicant and evidence of actual confusion can be used as reference factors to judge the likelihood of confusion.