Core Viewpoint - The case highlights the protection of an unregistered well-known trademark, specifically the "奔富" (Penfolds) brand, against malicious registration attempts by other companies [1][2][3]. Summary by Sections Basic Case Facts - 南某公司 is the rights holder of the well-known wine brand "Penfolds" and has used "奔富" as its Chinese name since the 1990s, achieving significant recognition among consumers [2]. - The brand "奔富" has been widely recognized and reported in various media, establishing a strong association with "Penfolds" [2]. Trademark Registration Attempts - Due to the commercial value of the "奔富" trademark, there were attempts by third parties to maliciously register similar trademarks, leading to a legal dispute [3]. - 南某公司 faced rejection from the trademark office when attempting to register "奔富" due to similarities with existing trademarks, prompting a series of legal actions that ultimately led to a favorable ruling from the Supreme People's Court [3]. Infringement Actions - 淮安华某公司 attempted to register similar trademarks and used them in their products, which led to a lawsuit from 南某公司 for trademark infringement [4]. - The court ruled in favor of 南某公司, ordering the defendants to cease their infringing activities and to compensate for damages [5]. Legal Reasoning - The court identified three main issues: whether "奔富" qualifies as an unregistered well-known trademark, whether the defendants' actions constituted trademark infringement, and the civil liabilities of the defendants if infringement was established [7]. - The court concluded that "奔富" could be recognized as an unregistered well-known trademark due to its established market presence and consumer recognition [8]. - The defendants' actions were deemed to constitute trademark infringement, as they knowingly used similar trademarks to benefit from the established reputation of "奔富" [9]. Legal Responsibilities - The court mandated the defendants to stop their infringing activities and to compensate 南某公司 for economic losses, affirming the legal rights of unregistered well-known trademarks [10]. Judicial Principles - The court established that unregistered trademarks widely known but not registered due to malicious attempts can be recognized and protected based on various factors, including duration of use and promotional efforts [12]. - It emphasized that actions taken in bad faith to register similar trademarks can lead to legal consequences, including the obligation to cease use and compensate the rightful trademark owner [12].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the legal framework and standards for the protection of unregistered well-known trademarks in China, emphasizing the importance of recognizing such trademarks based on their actual use and reputation in the market [4][5][6]. Group 1: Legal Basis for Protection - The establishment of the unregistered well-known trademark protection system is a necessary response to the globalization of trade, reflecting the need for trademark rights to adapt to international market dynamics [5]. - The essence of protecting unregistered well-known trademarks lies in the legal recognition of goodwill, which is an important intangible asset for businesses, representing consumer recognition and loyalty [5]. - The protection system aims to safeguard three legal interests: protecting the innovative investments of businesses, maintaining consumer trust, and ensuring fair market competition [6]. Group 2: Standards for Recognition - The rights to unregistered well-known trademarks are based on the principle of "rights arising from use," granting similar protections to those of registered trademarks [7]. - The court case involving "Penfolds" wine illustrates the criteria for recognizing an unregistered well-known trademark, including the duration of use, promotional investment, and public awareness [8]. Group 3: Liability for Infringement - The principle of good faith is crucial in trademark registration and use, aiming to prevent malicious registration and maintain order in trademark rights [9]. - The court emphasized that infringers who knowingly exploit unregistered well-known trademarks for unjust gains violate the principle of good faith, highlighting the need for accountability [9]. - The case established that infringers must not only cease their infringing activities but also bear compensation responsibilities, reinforcing the legal rights of unregistered well-known trademark holders [10].