Registering the same trademark as others obviously constitutes infringement, but if the content is only similar and the trademark management department allows registration, it does not constitute infringement. Under certain circumstances, we can identify the law according to the actual situation to avoid the wrong application of the law. The infringer usually bears the responsibility of stopping the infringement, and the actor who knows or should know that it is an infringement is also liable for compensation. If the circumstances are serious, they shall also bear criminal responsibility. The act of bearing the liability for compensation is to bear the liability for compensation. The infringer usually bears the responsibility of stopping the infringement, and the actor who knows or should know that it is an infringement is also liable for compensation. If the circumstances are serious, they shall also bear criminal responsibility.

Legal objectivity:

What are the criteria for identifying similar trademark infringement? 1. Behavior violation refers to the behavior of the actor that violates the provisions of the Trademark Law, the Regulations on the Implementation of the Trademark Law and other relevant laws, that is, the actor uses a trademark that is the same as or similar to the registered trademark of others on the same or similar goods without the permission of the trademark registrant, or hinders the trademark registrant from exercising the exclusive right to use the trademark. The existence of trademark infringement is a prerequisite for the formation of infringement. 2. The fact of damage is a special condition in trademark infringement. As for the fact of damage, it can be material damage or non-material damage. Substantial damage refers to reducing or eliminating the economic interests of trademark registrants. Non-material damage refers to the damage and depreciation to the commodity reputation and corporate image of the obligee due to the infringement of the exclusive right to use a trademark. Intangible damage was intangible and incalculable at that time, but it would eventually lead to the damage of the property interests of the obligee. In practice, the identification of material damage should be borne by the infringer, while the identification of non-material damage is difficult to bear the burden of proof, so the infringer does not need to bear the burden of proof. As long as there is an illegal act, it is considered as immaterial damage, and the infringed person can ask to stop the infringement. 3. There is a causal relationship between the illegal act and the fact of damage. The damage facts are different, and the causal relationship is also different. The illegal act of infringing the exclusive right to use a trademark has caused the objective existence of the damage facts, so there is a causal relationship between the infringement and the damage facts. For example, the quality of a fake brand-name wine is very poor, and consumers will mistakenly think that the quality of a brand-name wine has declined after drinking it. This is the causal relationship between tort and damage consequences. The fact that the damage is caused by other reasons does not constitute a constituent element of trademark infringement. 4. Subjective fault of the actor The new trademark law deletes the word "knowing" in Item (2) of Article 38 of the original law, that is, it cancels the subjective element of determining the infringement of the act and confirms the application of the principle of "no-fault liability". In other words, regardless of the subjective intention or negligence of the infringer, he should bear legal responsibility.