France’s Trademark Law of 1857 did not cover the protection of well-known trademarks, but French courts have already made precedents that have granted special protection to well-known trademarks. In 1964, the French Trademark Law added provisions for the protection of well-known trademarks, as stipulated in Article 4(2) of the Trademark Law, in line with Article 6bis of the Paris Convention. At this time, France and other civil law countries adopted relative protectionism for well-known trademarks to protect well-known trademarks. In 1992, France promulgated the Intellectual Property Code, which accepted the dilution theory and stipulated that "the use of a famous trademark on goods or services similar to those specified in the registration causes losses to the trademark owner or constitutes an infringement of the prohibition of use of the trademark. Civil liability should be borne.

The United States is a country that applies the use principle, and its trademark protection situation is unique compared to other civil law countries. In the U.S. trademark protection system, the anti-dilution laws of various states play an important role. The theory is a unique concept in American law, and "dilution" includes the following three aspects:

1. Defiling the relevant well-known trademark in a certain way;

2. Degrading the relevant well-known trademark in a certain way. Trademark;

3. Use indirect misunderstanding to cause consumers to misunderstand the trademark as the common name of the relevant product. However, the trademark must be a famous trademark. Only famous trademarks in the United States have the right to prohibit others from diluting the well-known name. The legislation on trademark protection was relatively late. The "Interim Provisions on the Recognition and Management of Well-known Trademarks" mainly extends protection to well-known trademarks in three aspects:

1. Prohibition of improper registration

It will be combined with If a trademark that is identical or similar to someone else's well-known trademark applies for registration on non-similar goods and may harm the rights and interests of the well-known trademark registrant, the Trademark Office may reject the registration application, and the well-known trademark registrant may request the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to cancel it.

2. Improper use is prohibited

Using a trademark that is identical or similar to someone else’s well-known trademark on non-similar goods will imply that the goods have some kind of relationship with the well-known trademark registrant. If the rights and interests of the well-known trademark registrant may be harmed, the well-known trademark registrant may request the industrial and commercial administration to stop it.

3. It is prohibited to use it as a trade name

From the date of trademark recognition, if others use words that are identical or similar to the well-known trademark as part of the company name, and may cause misunderstanding by the public, the industrial and commercial administration authorities will not register it; if it has been registered, the well-known trademark registrant may request be revoked. Article 13 of my country’s revised Trademark Law extends the protection of well-known trademarks to non-similar goods or services, formally establishing the expanded protection of well-known trademarks in legislation.