As public sentiments were gripped by the ongoing Tongguan Rougamo (Chinese meat sandwich) dispute, representatives from the Supreme Court shed light on issues concerning protection of geographic identification in a recent exclusive interview. 

Should the mark owners, upon obtaining the registered trademark, have the right to prohibit others from using the place names contained in the trademark? 

According to the representatives, some trademarks contain place names, which in frequent cases have unique commercial value. According to the provisions of the Trademark Law, even if the exclusive right to use a registered trademark is obtained, the obligee has no right to prohibit others from properly using the place names contained in the registered trademark. If another person properly uses the place name contained in the registered trademark and the obligee brings a relevant lawsuit to the people's court, the people's court shall not support it according to law. 

As for whether the registrant of the collective trademark of geographical indications may grant or deprive others of the right to use trademarks at will, representatives stressed that there would be no bar for those resided in the area marked by geographical indications and who met the conditions to use the geographical indications, be it a member of a collective, an association or other organization or not; those who do not meet the conditions for the use of geographical indications or exceed the area marked by geographical indications cannot obtain the qualification for the use of collective trademarks of geographical indications through trademark licensing, or participation to the league. The so-called membership fee and other similar fees collected through litigation by relevant organization as the trademark registrant may not comply with the provisions of the Trademark Law, nor would it be supported by the people's court according to law. 

Geographical indication, as the regional public resource, had determined by its nature the role its registrant shall play: a local and non-profit organization, exercising litigation rights in a legal, compliant and self-disciplined manner. There is no such legal basis in trademark law that allows individual associations and organizations to collect franchise fees using geographical indications collective trademarks, and the court, by the same token, will less likely to uphold any claim for such collection. 

Representatives further noted that, the people’s court is ready to cracked down on any litigation suspected of seeking illegal interests, infringing on the legitimate rights and interests of others or damaging the legitimate business interests of others. A series of judicial interpretations have been issued to prevent false litigation and malicious litigation (for example, the Reply of the Supreme People's Court on the Defendant's Claim for Compensation for Reasonable Expenses on the Basis of Plaintiff's Abuse of Rights in Intellectual Property Infringement Litigation). For plaintiff who maliciously filed a lawsuit, if the defendant requests the plaintiff to compensate for the reasonable attorney fees, transportation expenses, room and board expenses and other expenses paid by the lawsuit according to law, the people's court shall support it. For parties responsible for malicious lawsuits, the people's court may also impose fines and detention according to the seriousness of the case, and investigate criminal responsibility according to law if a crime is constituted.