伴随大众对食材风味的追求提升，"土特产"成为许多农产品企业打出的特色招牌。各类标注"土猪""土鸡"的产品 成为市场热点。然而，品牌商标与产品特性的模糊边界，也滋生了消费误导争议。2025年4月，新京报刊发《"壹 号土猪"争议标识开始替换，"壹号土"鸡是否合规？》一文，报道了广东壹号食品股份有限公司（以下简称"壹号 食品"）因将注册商标"壹号土 "与"猪""鸡"等农产品名称组合标注，导致消费者产生混淆的事件。 近日，新京报记者回访发现，壹号食品已在官网、电商平台和产品包装上替换"壹号土 "争议标识。如在电商平 台，猪肉肉制品产品名称均冠以"壹号土猪"字样，猪肉鲜肉产品冠以"壹号土R"字样，鸡肉产品则剥离"壹号土"相 关表述。商标方面，未有新的食品类别"壹号土猪""壹号土鸡"商标通过申请。 目前，商标合规性与消费误导风险仍是大众关注焦点。监管部门与消保组织提示，消费者需警惕"心机商标"陷 阱，通过细节核验避免踩坑，同时留好消费凭证保障自身权益。 产品包装与宣传调整 2025年上半年，有消费者反映，壹号食品在官网、门店及产品包装上，将已注册的"壹号土 "商标与"猪""鸡"等字 样紧密连用，字体、大小、颜色一致，远观 ...

每经编辑｜何小桃 11月8日，要潮人民咖啡馆发布声明，内容如下： 老式的搪瓷缸，提袋上印着的五角星......近日，一家以"用咖啡讲述中国故事"为特色的咖啡馆火了。 记者搜索发现，全国多地出现了以"人民咖啡馆"为店标、且装修高度相似的店家，已经成为社交平台的打卡新地标。 有网友表示，"人民"一词具有强烈的公共属性和政治内涵，这样被用于商业咖啡馆的标识，令人感到突兀和不适。其店标因使用"人民"字样，法律合规性 也遭到质疑。 天眼查显示，"人民咖啡馆"连锁店属于要潮（上海）文化传播有限公司，该公司成立于2020年。此前，该公司多次申请注册"人民咖啡馆"商标均未成功。 目前，在该公司注册的餐饮类商标中，仅"要潮人民咖啡馆""潮人民咖啡馆"两个商标显示已注册。 | | | 11月7日，人民网评发表评论文章《"人民咖啡馆"，不妥！》，该评论中提及： 此前该公司申请的"人民咖啡馆"商标还在审查阶段 记者注意到，"人民咖啡馆"的认证账号显示，该品牌已拥有27家线下门店，分别分布于上海、北京、重庆、天津、哈尔滨、南昌、长春等城市。在该账号 发布的门店宣传视频中，多家门店均以"人民咖啡馆"和五角星作为店名和门头，并未在显眼处看 ...

Core Viewpoint - Wahaha is undergoing significant internal changes, including the introduction of a new brand "Wah Xiaozong" starting from the 2026 sales year, coinciding with the resignation of Zong Fuli from her positions within the company. This transformation is influenced by trademark compliance issues, resistance to reform, and family conflicts [1][3]. Group 1: Internal Changes and Leadership - Zong Fuli's resignation is closely linked to trademark usage non-compliance, as the company's ownership structure requires unanimous consent from all shareholders for trademark use. Her attempt to transfer Wahaha resources to Hongsheng Group without paying trademark fees led to a halt in 387 core trademark transfer applications [1][3]. - During her tenure, Zong Fuli implemented reforms focused on standardization, process optimization, and digitalization, contrasting sharply with the management style of her predecessor, Zong Qinghou. These changes included restructuring the organization and adjusting the dealer system, which caused dissatisfaction among Zong Qinghou's former subordinates [3][4]. Group 2: Family Conflicts and Legal Issues - Zong Fuli is embroiled in family disputes regarding the ownership of a $2.1 billion offshore trust, with the Hong Kong High Court freezing the asset and rejecting her appeal. Additionally, there are ongoing claims from non-marital family members for a share of Wahaha Group's 29.4% equity, complicating the situation further [3][4]. - The employee stockholding committee is also facing legal challenges due to lawsuits from former employees, which have delayed the completion of necessary business changes [3]. Group 3: Financial Performance and Market Position - Despite the leadership changes, Wahaha's financial performance remains strong, with a 53% year-on-year increase in net sales revenue for 2024, marking the highest growth rate in history. The first quarter of 2025 also saw sales growth maintained at over 30%, with the company retaining its market share leadership in the dairy beverage and instant porridge sectors [3][4]. Group 4: New Brand Strategy and Challenges - The new brand "Wah Xiaozong" will grant Zong Fuli full decision-making authority, potentially enhancing decision-making efficiency. The brand aims to penetrate the rapidly growing sugar-free tea market, which has significant growth potential in China compared to Japan [4]. - However, the transition to "Wah Xiaozong" presents challenges, including the need to balance legal compliance, market acceptance, and emotional connection with consumers. The success of the new brand will depend on Zong Fuli's ability to navigate these complexities while maintaining Wahaha's traditional values [5].

Core Viewpoint - The increasing use of specific words or numbers as trademarks in the food industry raises concerns about the clarity and accuracy of product information conveyed to consumers, as exemplified by the "Duoban" (多半) trademark used by White Elephant Foods, which has led to public debate regarding its implications on product weight perception [1][2][3] Group 1: Trademark Usage and Consumer Perception - The "Duoban" trademark is registered and does not directly describe the product's weight, yet consumers interpret it as indicating a significant increase in quantity, leading to confusion and dissatisfaction [1][2] - White Elephant Foods' "Duoban" products are marketed as larger portions, but the actual weight increase is only about 25 grams compared to standard products, which does not align with consumer expectations of "more than half" [3][4] - The trademark's registration may have been facilitated by extensive marketing efforts, which have established a strong association between the term and the brand, despite its misleading implications [4][5] Group 2: Industry Implications and Regulatory Concerns - The incident highlights a broader issue in the food industry where packaging and branding often mislead consumers, leading to a loss of trust in brands and the industry as a whole [6][10] - There is a call for stricter regulations and standards regarding the use of trademarks that may mislead consumers about product attributes, emphasizing the need for clarity and accuracy in marketing [12][13] - The reliance on misleading marketing tactics can harm long-term brand loyalty and market stability, as consumers may avoid brands that they perceive as deceptive [14][15]