{"id":212739,"date":"2016-05-09T08:23:00","date_gmt":"2016-05-09T08:23:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/citifmonline.com\/?p=212739"},"modified":"2016-05-09T08:23:00","modified_gmt":"2016-05-09T08:23:00","slug":"facebook-wins-china-trademark-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/citifmonline.com\/2016\/05\/facebook-wins-china-trademark-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Facebook wins China trademark case"},"content":{"rendered":"
A Beijing court has ruled in favour of Facebook and against a Chinese company which had registered “face book” as a separate trademark.<\/p>\n
The court said the firm had “violated moral principles” with “obvious intention to duplicate and copy from another high-profile trademark”.<\/p>\n
The Zhongshan Pearl River company had registered the name in 2014.<\/p>\n
Facebook is blocked in China but has recently gone on a charm offensive to access the Chinese market.<\/p>\n
The court statement – released on April 28 but not widely covered in English – has led Chinese local media to speculate whether Beijing’s hard stance against Facebook might soften.<\/p>\n
During a recent visit to China, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg met with China’s propaganda chief Liu Yunshan as well as fellow media guru Jack Ma.<\/p>\n
In what critics described as a publicity stunt to win China’s favour, he also went for a run on Beijing’s Tiananmen Square despite heavy pollution.<\/p>\n
Trademark woes
\nWestern companies are frequently struggling to have their trademarks upheld in China as they have to prove that their brand name is also well known within the country.<\/p>\n
Only last week, Apple lost a trademark fight in China, meaning firms that sell handbags and other leather goods can continue to use the name “IPHONE”.<\/p>\n
Xintong Tiandi trademarked “IPHONE” for leather products in China in 2010.<\/p>\n
Apple filed a trademark bid for the name for electronic goods in 2002, but it was not approved until 2013.<\/p>\n
–<\/p>\n
Source: BBC<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A Beijing court has ruled in favour of Facebook and against a Chinese company which had registered “face book” as a separate trademark. The court said the firm had “violated moral principles” with “obvious intention to duplicate and copy from another high-profile trademark”. The Zhongshan Pearl River company had registered the name in 2014. Facebook […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[106],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n