Core Viewpoint - China National Pharmaceutical Group (Sinopharm Group) has issued a statement regarding its relationship with China Medicine Holdings Co., Ltd. (Medicine Holdings), emphasizing that it has no current equity or control relationship with Medicine Holdings after transferring its 25% stake [3][4]. Group 1 - Sinopharm Group's subsidiary, China Traditional Chinese Medicine Co., Ltd. (Sinopharm TCM), has publicly announced the transfer of its 25% stake in Medicine Holdings to Shanghai Tianyue Tenghua Trading Service Co., Ltd. [3] - Following the completion of this transfer, Sinopharm TCM will no longer hold any equity in Medicine Holdings, and there will be no equity or control relationship between Sinopharm Group, Sinopharm TCM, and Medicine Holdings [4]. - Sinopharm Group has never authorized Medicine Holdings or its subsidiaries to use its trademarks or engage in activities under its name, and it does not take responsibility for any actions taken by Medicine Holdings [5]. Group 2 - Medicine Holdings has allegedly used Sinopharm Group's trademarks and business names without authorization, constituting serious infringement, leading Sinopharm Group to initiate legal proceedings [5]. - Sinopharm Group has previously issued multiple statements condemning Medicine Holdings for trademark infringement and other legal disputes, including issues related to unpaid debts [5][7]. - Medicine Holdings has been flagged with multiple negative labels, including operational abnormalities and being a subject of enforcement actions, with no registered employees for 2023 and 2024 [6]. Group 3 - Sinopharm Group is a central enterprise directly managed by the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission, focusing on life and health, and is a leader in the global industry with over 1,600 subsidiaries [8].

Core Viewpoint - The legal dispute over the name "Guizhou Wine" has reached a conclusion, with a court ruling requiring Shanghai Guizhou Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Guizhou Wine Sales Co., Ltd. to cease using the name "Guizhou Wine," which is associated with Guizhou Wine Group Co., Ltd. [1][2] Summary by Sections Dispute Background - The trademark dispute between *ST Rock and Guizhou Wine dates back six years, initiated by *ST Rock's name change to Shanghai Guizhou in 2019 amid the rising popularity of sauce-flavored liquor [4]. - Guizhou Wine filed a lawsuit against *ST Rock for trademark infringement and unfair competition, leading to a prolonged legal battle [4]. - The historical context shows that Guizhou Wine has a rich heritage dating back to 1950, while *ST Rock has frequently changed its business focus, earning the nickname "A-share name change king" [4]. Legal Proceedings - In July 2021, a court ruled in favor of Guizhou Wine, ordering *ST Rock to cease infringing on Guizhou Wine's trademarks and to pay damages of 1 million yuan [5]. - Following an appeal, the Jiangsu High Court increased the compensation to 1.5 million yuan and expanded the scope of infringement [6]. - The recent final ruling mandates that *ST Rock must stop using the name "Guizhou Wine" and pay a total of 4.1885 million yuan in damages and legal fees [6]. Financial Impact on *ST Rock - The ruling adds significant cash flow pressure on *ST Rock, which reported cash and cash equivalents of 4.7428 million yuan as of June 2025 [7]. - The company's financial troubles stem from the collapse of its affiliate, Haiyin Group, which faced a funding crisis and legal issues [7]. - In the first half of 2025, *ST Rock's revenue plummeted by 85.22% year-on-year to 28.2496 million yuan, with a net loss of 67.7668 million yuan [9]. - The company has struggled with inventory management, with a significant portion of its inventory being non-core products and nearing expiration [9][10].

Core Viewpoint - The legal dispute between *ST Yanshi and Guizhou Guijiu has reached a conclusion, with a court ruling prohibiting the use of the name "Guijiu" by Shanghai Guijiu, further complicating the already troubled situation for *ST Yanshi [1][5]. Summary by Sections Dispute Background - The trademark dispute dates back six years, initiated by Guizhou Guijiu in December 2019, claiming infringement of trademark rights against *ST Yanshi, which had rebranded itself as Shanghai Guijiu in 2019 [3][4]. - The rebranding was part of *ST Yanshi's strategy to enter the booming sauce liquor market, which had gained popularity since 2018 [3][4]. Legal Proceedings - A series of court rulings have occurred, with the initial judgment in July 2021 requiring *ST Yanshi to cease infringing activities and pay Guizhou Guijiu 1 million yuan in damages [4][5]. - Subsequent appeals led to increased compensation demands, culminating in a final ruling that requires *ST Yanshi to stop using the "Guijiu" name and pay a total of 4.1885 million yuan in damages [5][6]. Financial Impact - The recent ruling adds significant cash flow pressure on *ST Yanshi, which reported cash and cash equivalents of 4.7428 million yuan as of June 2025 [7]. - The company has faced declining performance, with a reported revenue of 28.2496 million yuan in the first half of 2025, a decrease of 85.22% year-on-year, and a net loss of 67.7668 million yuan [9]. - Inventory issues are severe, with a total inventory balance of 146 million yuan, primarily consisting of finished goods and semi-finished products, making up 99% of total inventory [10].

Core Viewpoint - Shanghai Gui Jiu Co., Ltd. (stock abbreviation "*ST Rock", stock code "600696.SH") has lost a trademark dispute with Guizhou Gui Jiu, resulting in a court ruling that prohibits the company from using the name "Gui Jiu" and requires compensation for economic losses [1][5]. Group 1 - The lawsuit involved Guizhou Gui Jiu Group Co., Ltd. suing multiple defendants, including Shanghai Gui Jiu and others, for trademark infringement [5]. - The Nanjing Intermediate People's Court initially ruled in favor of Shanghai Gui Jiu on July 13, 2021, but Guizhou Gui Jiu appealed, leading to a higher court's decision to overturn the initial ruling on May 17, 2022 [5][6]. - The Jiangsu High People's Court's recent ruling requires Shanghai Gui Jiu and associated companies to cease using the "Gui Jiu" name and pay a total of 4.18847 million yuan in damages and legal fees to Guizhou Gui Jiu [6]. Group 2 - The historical background of Guizhou Gui Jiu dates back to 1950 when it was established as a state-owned enterprise, later privatized in 2009 and fully acquired by Yanghe Brewery in 2016 [6]. - Shanghai Gui Jiu was formerly known as Shanghai Rock Enterprise Development Co., Ltd. and entered the liquor industry in December 2019, subsequently changing its name [6]. - The legal prohibition on using the "Shanghai Gui Jiu" name poses significant challenges for the company, which is already facing operational and debt crises, as indicated by its financial report showing a revenue decline of 85.22% year-on-year and a net loss of 67.7668 million yuan for the first half of 2025 [6].

Core Viewpoint - The final ruling in the trademark dispute case has resulted in *ST Yanshi being ordered to pay over 4.18 million yuan and to cease using the name "Guijiu" [1][2]. Legal Proceedings - The case involves a trademark infringement dispute where the plaintiff, Guizhou Guijiu Group Co., Ltd., sued *ST Yanshi and other companies for violating trademark rights [2][3]. - The Jiangsu Provincial High People's Court issued a final judgment, ordering *ST Yanshi to compensate Guizhou Guijiu a total of 4.18847 million yuan for economic losses and reasonable legal fees [3]. Financial Impact - The ruling will lead to a reduction in *ST Yanshi's current profits as the company will account for the compensation [4]. - The company reported a significant decline in revenue, with a 85.22% year-on-year drop in the first half of 2025, amounting to 28.25 million yuan [8]. Company Background - *ST Yanshi, previously known as Shanghai Yanshi Co., Ltd., has undergone multiple name changes since its establishment in 1989 and has been involved in the liquor industry [6]. - The company has faced ongoing financial difficulties, including a risk of delisting due to failing to meet revenue and profit thresholds set by the Shanghai Stock Exchange [7]. Market Performance - As of October 10, *ST Yanshi's stock closed at 5.81 yuan per share, reflecting a year-to-date decline of 52.76% [9].

Core Viewpoint - The trademark dispute between *ST Rock and Guizhou Guijiu Group has concluded with *ST Rock losing the case, resulting in a fine and the loss of the "Guijiu" name, which poses significant risks to its brand and financial stability [1][3]. Group 1: Legal Outcome - *ST Rock was ordered to pay a total of 418.85 million yuan in damages and legal fees due to trademark infringement and unfair competition [1][2]. - The court mandated *ST Rock to cease using the "Guijiu" name and related trademarks immediately [2][5]. Group 2: Financial Impact - The company announced that the legal ruling will lead to a reduction in its current profits due to the financial penalties imposed [3]. - The loss of the "Guijiu" name necessitates a complete rebranding, which includes changes to product packaging, advertising, and distribution channels, incurring high costs and potential consumer confusion [3][4]. Group 3: Historical Context - The trademark dispute dates back to December 2019 when Guizhou Guijiu filed a lawsuit against *ST Rock for using the "Guijiu" name [4]. - Previous court rulings had varied, with initial judgments favoring *ST Rock before the case was ultimately overturned in favor of Guizhou Guijiu [4][5].

Core Viewpoint - The trademark dispute over "Guizhou Wine" has concluded, with Shanghai Guizhou losing the case and being ordered to cease using the name and compensate Guizhou Guizhou for economic losses [2][4][5]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The lawsuit initiated by Guizhou Guizhou Group against Shanghai Guizhou and its affiliates for trademark infringement began with a first-instance judgment on July 13, 2021, by the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court [4]. - Guizhou Guizhou appealed the first-instance ruling, leading to a higher court's decision on May 17, 2022, to revoke the initial judgment and remand the case for retrial [4][5]. - The final ruling from the Jiangsu High Court ordered Shanghai Guizhou and its affiliates to stop infringing on Guizhou Guizhou's trademark rights and to cease using the name "Guizhou" [5][6]. Group 2: Financial Implications - Shanghai Guizhou is required to compensate Guizhou Guizhou a total of 4.18847 million yuan for economic losses and reasonable legal fees within ten days of the ruling [5]. - Following the judgment, Shanghai Guizhou indicated that it would adjust its accounting practices, which would lead to a reduction in its current profits [6]. - In its recent semi-annual report, Shanghai Guizhou reported a revenue of 28.2496 million yuan, a year-on-year decline of 85.22%, and a net loss attributable to shareholders of 67.7668 million yuan [6]. Group 3: Company Background - Guizhou Guizhou, established in 1950 as "Guiyang Distillery," is a well-known brand in Guizhou and one of the earliest state-owned distilleries in the province [5]. - In 2016, Guizhou Guizhou was fully acquired by Yanghe Brewery, becoming a significant brand asset under Yanghe [5]. - Shanghai Guizhou, which transitioned into the liquor industry in December 2019, has a complex background and was previously known as "Shanghai Rock Enterprise Development Co., Ltd." [5].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the unethical and illegal practices of a restaurant management company, led by Yan Wenwei, which engaged in trademark squatting and imitation of established brands, leading to its rapid downfall due to media exposure and regulatory intervention [1][2]. Group 1: Unethical Practices - Yan Wenwei's company utilized a systematic approach to identify and exploit unregistered or similar trademarks of popular local restaurants, creating confusion among consumers [1][2]. - The company registered over 500 trademarks, many of which were not used, indicating malicious intent to hoard trademarks [1]. Group 2: Legal Implications - The actions of the company violate trademark laws, which require honesty and integrity in trademark registration and prohibit the use of unfair means to register trademarks already in use by others [1][2]. - The behavior disrupts market competition and harms both the original restaurants and consumers, leading to potential administrative and civil liabilities [3]. Group 3: Regulatory and Market Response - Regulatory bodies can impose penalties, including fines and revocation of business licenses, on companies engaging in such deceptive practices [3]. - Original restaurants can seek legal recourse for damages, with potential compensation up to five million yuan if losses are difficult to quantify [3]. Group 4: Recommendations for Prevention - Businesses need to enhance their awareness of intellectual property rights to protect against trademark squatting, particularly those with established reputations but unregistered trademarks [4][5]. - Trademark approval departments should be vigilant in monitoring for abnormal patterns of trademark registrations to prevent malicious activities [4][5].

Core Points - The company clarifies that it has not authorized any third party to use the "雪球" trademark in relation to high-risk automatic knock-in knock-out options products, which has caused confusion among users and investors [1] - The company has taken legal action to protect its trademark rights and the interests of investors [1][2] - The "雪球" trademark was registered in 2017 and is protected under trademark law, prohibiting unauthorized use [2] - The company has successfully won multiple trademark infringement cases, affirming its exclusive rights to the "雪球" trademark [2] - The company advises users and investors to fully understand the structure and risk characteristics of complex financial derivatives like automatic knock-in knock-out options before investing [3]

Core Points - The Beijing Haidian District Market Supervision Administration has cracked down on a retail store selling products that allegedly infringe on the registered trademark rights of "Pop Mart" [1] - The investigation was initiated based on consumer reports, leading to the discovery of multiple blind boxes and plush accessories marked with "POP MART" and "THE MONSTERS" that closely resembled genuine products [1] - The infringing products were confirmed to be unauthorized and of inferior quality, lacking proper anti-counterfeiting measures [1] Summary by Sections Trademark Infringement Case - The involved merchant purchased the infringing products from unofficial online channels and sold them at prices lower than the genuine products [1] - The Haidian District Market Supervision Administration imposed administrative penalties, including confiscation of all infringing goods and fines, and ordered the merchant to cease infringement activities [1] - Confiscated infringing products will be destroyed, and investigations will trace back to the upstream suppliers [1] Consumer Awareness and Protection - The Market Supervision Administration has reminded consumers that "Pop Mart" products have high market recognition, and infringing products often have poor material quality and craftsmanship, posing potential health risks [2] - Consumers are encouraged to report suspected infringing products by calling hotlines 12315 or 12345 to help maintain a fair market environment [2] - Retailers are advised to strictly comply with trademark laws and refrain from purchasing or selling unauthorized products [2]