The red can dispute between Wanglaoji and Jiaduobao originated from trademark leasing. On December 29, 2011, the China Trade Arbitration Commission ruled that the Wanglaoji trademark returned to GPHL.

After losing the "Wanglaoji" trademark, Jiaduobao believed that the packaging of Guangzhou Pharmaceutical's newly launched red can Wonglaoji was highly similar to Jiaduobao's red can herbal tea packaging, infringing Jiaduobao's red can decoration patent. Wong Lao Kat believes that the "red can" and the trademark are inseparable and both belong to Wong Lao Kat.

The "Red Can" case was filed in July 2012. After 896 days, the Guangdong Provincial Higher People's Court made a first-instance judgment on December 19, 2014: the ownership of the red can herbal tea decoration ultimately belonged to Wanglaoji. The outer packaging of Jiaduobao herbal tea has constituted infringement of Wanglaoji.

Jiaduobao was judged to compensate Wanglaoji for economic losses of 150 million yuan and reasonable rights protection expenses of more than 260,000 yuan. After losing the first instance, Jiaduobao appealed again.

Extended information:

On the evening of August 16, 2019, Baiyunshan (Baiyunshan’s parent company of Wanglaoji) and Jiaduobao both issued announcements disclosing the Supreme Court’s decision on Wanglaoji and Jiaduobao. The final verdict of many Bao cases.

The verdict requires Jiaduobao to immediately stop publishing product advertisements containing "For every 10 cans of herbal tea sold in China, 7 cans of Jiaduobao" are printed, and stop using the slogan "Jiaduobao, the red canned herbal tea that leads the country in sales" "Bao" product packaging, and compensated GPHL and Wanglaoji for economic losses and reasonable expenses totaling 1 million yuan.

The judgment found that Jiaduobao’s “renamed” series of advertisements, “The nationally-leading red canned herbal tea has been renamed Jiaduobao” and “the original red canned Wanglaoji has been renamed Jiaduobao herbal tea” do not constitute false propaganda; This judgment also rejects the previous first-instance and second-instance judgments, and rejects other claims of GPHL (GPharm is the controlling shareholder of Baiyunshan) and Wanglaoji. < /p>