业界新闻：
2025修订！《中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法》全文发布
2025 Revision! Full Text Released: Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China
中华人民共和国主席令
Order of the President of the People's Republic of China
第五十号
No. 50
《中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法》已由中华人民共和国第十四届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十六次会议于2025年6月27日修订通过，现予公布，自2025年10月15日起施行。
The Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China, revised and passed at the 16th session of the Standing Committee of the 14th National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China on June 27, 2025, is hereby promulgated and will take effect on October 15, 2025.
中华人民共和国主席 习近平
The President of the People's Republic of China, Xi Jinping
2025年6月27日
June 27, 2025
（来源：中国人大网）
(Source: website of the National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China)
《中美欧日韩五局外观设计视图提交指导手册》发布
The Informative User Guide for the View and Drawing Requirements of Designs of the ID5 Offices Released
《中美欧日韩五局外观设计视图提交指导手册》是中国国家知识产权局与欧盟知识产权局联合牵头的合作项目成果。该手册通过对五局外观设计视图提交要求的比较与梳理，以图文结合的方式，较为全面地展示了五局外观设计视图提交要求，供创新主体借鉴和参考。
The Informative User Guide for the View and Drawing Requirements of Designs of the Industrial Design 5 (ID5) Offices is a joint project led by the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). By comparing and analyzing the views and drawing requirements of the ID5 offices, the Guide offers a comprehensive presentation in both text and visual formats. This resource serves as a valuable reference for innovators.
获取更多项目成果，请访问官方网站：https://id-five.org。
For more project outcomes, please visit the official website: https://id-five.org.
（来源：中国国家知识产权局网站）
(Source: website of the CNIPA)
中哈签订知识产权领域合作谅解备忘录
China and Kazakhstan Sign Memorandum of Understanding and Cooperation in the Field of Intellectual Property
日前举行的第二届中国—中亚峰会期间，在中国国家主席习近平和哈萨克斯坦总统托卡耶夫的共同见证下，国家知识产权局与哈萨克斯坦共和国司法部交换了《中华人民共和国国家知识产权局与哈萨克斯坦共和国司法部知识产权领域合作谅解备忘录》。该谅解备忘录被纳入第二届中国—中亚峰会成果清单。
During the second China-Central Asia Summit, under the joint witness of Chinese President Xi Jinping and Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) and the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan exchanged the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Cooperation in the Field of Intellectual Property between the National Intellectual Property Administration of the People's Republic of China and the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan . The MoU has been included in the list of deliverables of the second China-Central Asia Summit.
（来源：中国国家知识产权局网站）
(Source: website of the CNIPA)
典型案例：
集佳代理邮储银行首次认定商标驰名，成功制止恶意侵权人的侵权行为
Unitalen Represents Postal Savings Bank of China in First-Ever Well-Known Trademark Recognition, Successfully Halts Acts of Infringement of Malicious Infringers
基本案情
Case Brief
邮储银行的前身可追溯至1919年开办的邮政储金业务，至今已有百年历史。2007年3月，根据国务院金融体制改革总体安排，经国务院批准，中国邮政储蓄银行有限责任公司挂牌成立。2007年11月，邮储银行申请注册“
”等商标并于2010年3月、9月陆续核准注册，核定使用服务为银行、金融服务、储蓄银行等。
The origins of the Postal Savings Bank of China can be traced back to the postal savings business established in 1919 boasting a history of over a century. In March 2007, pursuant to the State Council’s overall plan for financial system reform and with its approval, Postal Savings Bank of China Co., Ltd. was officially established. In November 2007, the Postal Savings Bank of China applied for the registration of trademarks, including "
", which were approved for registration in March and September 2010. The trademarks were designated for use in services such as banking, financial services, and savings banks.
邮储肥料公司等于2011年5月申请注册“邮储肥”等商标，后续又陆续申请注册“政储”“邮储甄好”“邮蓄肥”等多枚商标，长期在生产、销售的化肥产品上使用“邮储肥”等商标，并通过线下门店、网站及抖音平台进行宣传推广和销售；产品包装使用了邮政专用的黄绿配色，包装上及相关的宣传、推广中大量使用“邮储相伴”“邮储配送”等宣传用语。还将“邮储”登记为企业字号并使用，注册“youchufeiliao.com”域名等。针对邮储肥料公司等上述商标侵权及不正当竞争行为，邮储银行依法向徐州市中级人民法院提起诉讼。
In May 2011, Postal Storage Fertilizer Company and others applied for registration of trademarks, including “邮储肥 (You Chu Fei)”. Subsequently, they applied for additional trademarks such as “政储 (Zheng Chu)”, “邮储甄好 (You Chu Zhen Hao)”, and “邮蓄肥 (You Chu Fei)”. They used trademarks like “邮储肥 (You Chu Fei)” on fertilizer products they manufactured and sold over an extended period, and promoted and sold these products through offline stores, websites, and the Douyin platform. The product packaging adopted the yellow-green color scheme exclusive to the Postal Savings Bank and extensively featured promotional slogans such as “邮储相伴 (You Chu Xiang Ban)” and “邮储配送 (You Chu Pei Song)” on packaging and in related publicity and promotions. Additionally, they registered “邮储 (You Chu)” as part of their enterprise name and used it, along with registering the domain name “youchufeiliao.com” and others.Against the above acts of trademark infringement and unfair competition of the Postal Storage Fertilizer Company and others, the Postal Savings Bank of China filed a lawsuit with the Xuzhou Intermediate People's Court in accordance with the law.
法院判决
Court Judgment
徐州市中级人民法院一审认定，邮储银行的“
”商标、 “
”商标、“
”商标在2011年之前已在中国境内为相关公众广泛知晓，构成驰名商标。邮储肥料公司、冯某某等恶意申请注册“邮储肥”“政储”“邮储甄好”等商标，并在肥料产品上大量使用的行为构成商标侵权，登记并使用包含“邮储”文字的企业名称，构成不正当竞争，该判决已生效。
In the first instance, the Xuzhou Intermediate People's Court ruled that the trademarks "
", "
", and "
" of the Postal Savings Bank of China were widely recognized by the relevant public in China before 2011, constituting well-known trademarks. The malicious application for registration of the trademarks such as "邮储肥 (You Chu Fei)", "政储 (Zheng Chu)", and "邮储甄好 (You Chu Zhen Hao)" performed by the Postal Storage Fertilizer Company, Feng XX and others, and their acts of extensive use of the above trademarks on fertilizer products constituted trademark infringement. Registration and use of the enterprise name containing the characters "邮储 (You Chu)" constituted unfair competition. This judgment has come into effect.
案件意义
Case Significance
作为关系国家安全和国民经济命脉的国有企业，集佳不仅助力邮储银行实现了“
”“
”“
”三枚商标的首次认驰，保护了邮储银行的合法权益，同时也沉重地打击了攀附国企的恶意商标侵权行为，避免该恶意侵权行为继续损害消费者，继续破坏公平、诚信的市场竞争秩序。
Representing the Postal Savings Bank of China, a state-owned enterprise critical to national security and the national economy, Unitalen not only secured the first-ever recognition of the three trademarks "
", "
", and "
" as well-known trademarks, thereby protecting the bank’s legitimate rights and interests, but also effectively curbed malicious trademark infringement attempts to exploit state-owned enterprises, preventing further harm to consumers and upholding the fair and honest market competition order.
集佳代理“TATA”商标侵权案反转，恶意抢注行为终被法律制裁
Unitalen Wins Reversal in "TATA" Trademark Infringement Case - Malicious Squatter Finally Meets Legal Sanctions
案件概要
Case Brief
博士隆公司以其持有的核定使用在第6类“金属门”等商品上的“TATA”商标向源木公司（北京闼闼公司经销商）主张权利，指控其在销售的两款门型上使用“TATA”标识构成侵权。源木公司以其经过北京闼闼公司授权，合法使用第19类“非金属门”上的“TATA”商标进行抗辩。成都高新区法院一审认定，涉案的两款门均为金属门，侵害了博士隆公司的商标专用权。
Doctor Long Company, based on its “TATA” trademark registered for use on Class 6 goods, such as “metal doors,” asserted rights against Yuanmu Company (a distributor of Beijing Tata Company), alleging that Yuanmu’s use of the “TATA” mark on two door models it sold constituted infringement.The Yuanmu Company defended that it was authorized by the Beijing Tata Company to legitimately use the trademark "TATA" registered in Class 19 for "non-metal doors" Chengdu High-tech Industrial Development Zone People's Court ruled in the first instance that both door models involved were metal doors, infringing the exclusive trademark rights of the Doctor Long Company.
二审抗辩：
Second Instance Defense:
1、结合行业标准与权威文件、对方的检测报告及《类似商品和服务区分表》载明的第六类商品的限定，精准锚定商品分类，多角度举证再次强调商品分类逻辑，打破“金属门”定性。
1. By integrating industry standards, authoritative documents, the opposing party's test reports, and limitations on goods of Class 6 specified in the Similar Goods and Services Classification Table, Unitalen’s attorneys precisely pinpointed the product classification, presented multi-angle evidence to re-emphasize the classification logic of goods, and rebutted the "metal door" characterization.
2、通过展示被告的销售场景及涉案门类需定制化的产品特性，强化“无混淆可能性”论证，阻断侵权链条。
2. By demonstrating the defendant's sales scenarios and the product features of the doors involved that require customization, Unitalen’s attorneys strengthened the argument of "no likelihood of confusion", blocking the infringement chain.
3、在先判决已经认定北京闼闼公司“TATA”商标构成驰名商标，并且原告已经被判令停止使用“TATA”商标于门类产品，其自身无权主张他人侵权。同时向法院列举了原告抢注系列商标、设立关联公司、在全国多地以经销商为被告发起同类诉讼等混淆市场、滥用司法资源的证据，强力举证了原告的恶意攀附历史，强调其诉讼恶意。
3. Prior judgments had recognized Beijing Tata Company’s “TATA” trademark as a well-known trademark, and the plaintiff had been ordered to cease using the “TATA” trademark on door products. Therefore, the plaintiff itself had no right to assert infringement against others. Simultaneously, Unitalen’s attorneys submitted evidence to the court including squatting series trademarks, establishing affiliated companies, initiating similar lawsuits against distributors nationwide, etc. performed by the plaintiff, all of which confused the market and abused judicial resources. This powerfully proves the plaintiff's history of malicious free-riding and highlights its bad faith in litigation.
二审判决
Second Instance Judgment
成都中院二审认为，结合行业内相关公众的认知以及《类似商品和服务区分表》载明的第六类商品的限定，本案被诉均属于非金属门。源木装饰公司经北京闼闼公司授权许可有权使用注册在第19类“非金属门”上的“TATA”商标。结合源木装饰公司使用“TATA”标识的方式、“TATA”构成驰名商标的认定，消费者能够认识到源木装饰公司销售的产品来源于北京闼闼公司。而博士隆公司因为侵权故意，已经被禁止使用其权利商标，消费者更加不会误认被诉产品来源于博士隆公司。综上认定源木装饰公司不构成商标侵权和不正当竞争，驳回博士隆公司的全部诉讼请求。
Chengdu Intermediate People's Court held in the second instance that, based on relevant public perception in the industry and limitations on goods of Class 6 specified in the Similar Goods and Services Classification Table, the accused products in this case all belong to non-metal doors. The Yuanmu Decoration Company was authorized and licensed by the Beijing Tata Company to use the trademark "TATA" registered in Class 19 for "non-metal doors". Considering the manner of Yuanmu Decoration Company's use of the mark "TATA" and the recognition of "TATA" as a well-known trademark, consumers could recognize that products sold by the Yuanmu Decoration Company originated from the Beijing Tata Company. Since the Doctor Long Company had been prohibited from using its registered trademark due to intentional infringement, consumers were even less likely to mistake the accused products as originating from Doctor Long Company. To sum up, it is determined that the Yuanmu Decoration Company’s acts did not constitute trademark infringement or unfair competition. All lawsuits and claims of the Doctor Long Company were dismissed.
案件意义
Case Significance
本案涉及商标侵权认定、商品类别区分及权利商标被认定恶意抢注已被禁止使用等关键法律问题，不仅为行业提供了重要判例，也对规范市场竞争、打击商标投机行为具有深远意义。
This case addresses critical legal issues, including trademark infringement determinations, classification of goods, and the prohibition of a registered trademark deemed maliciously squatted. It not only provides a significant precedent for the industry, but also has profound implications for regulating market competition and combating trademark speculation.
“美巢”商标保卫战大获全胜，一审法院支持500万索赔
"MACO" Trademark Defense Secures Complete Victory, First Instance Court Supports 5,000,000 yuan in Damages
基本案情
Case Brief
美巢集团作为家装建材行业的领军企业，凭借近30年的深耕发展，建立起以“美巢”为核心的品牌体系。集团旗下拥有多个“美巢”系列注册商标及子品牌，在业内享有极高的品牌美誉度。
As a leading enterprise in the home decoration and building materials industry, MACO Group has built a brand system centered on "MACO" through nearly three decades of dedicated development. The group owns multiple registered trademarks of "MACO" series and sub-brands, enjoying exceptional brand reputation in the industry.
经调查发现，江苏美巢公司、美巢易装公司及安徽美巢公司恶意注册包含“美巢”字号的企业名称，使用“美巢蓝盾”“美巢锢”等侵权标识生产销售同类竞争产品，此外还通过仿冒美巢环保认证标识、摹仿产品包装设计、宣传用语等多重手段刻意制造市场混淆，企图与美巢集团建立虚假关联。
Investigations revealed that Jiangsu Meichao Company, Meichao Yizhuang Company, and Anhui Meichao Company maliciously registered enterprise names incorporating the trade name “美巢” and used infringing marks such as “美巢蓝盾 (Mei Chao Lan Dun)” and “美巢锢 (Mei Chao Gu)” to produce and sell competing products. Additionally, they deliberately created market confusion through multiple means, including counterfeiting MACO’s environmental certification marks, imitating product packaging designs, and mimicking promotional language, attempting to establish false associations with the MACO Group.
值得注意的是，江苏美巢公司早在（2021）川知民终896号案件中就被法院认定构成商标侵权，但其不仅拒不履行生效判决，反而通过设立关联公司的方式进一步扩大侵权规模。
Notably, the Jiangsu Meichao Company was already adjudged to have committed trademark infringement in case (2021) Chuan Zhi Min Zhong No. 896 by the court, yet not only refused to comply with the effective judgment, but also further expanded the scale of infringement by establishing affiliated companies.
集佳律所再次代理美巢集团向江苏美巢公司等提起诉讼，一审再次获得胜诉。
Unitalen Law Office once again represented the MACO Group in filing a lawsuit against the Jiangsu Meichao Company and others, securing another victory in the first instance.
法院观点
Court Opinion
南京中院在本案中全面采纳了原告美巢集团的诉讼主张，从商标侵权、不正当竞争、连带责任及赔偿计算等多个维度进行了详细认定，认定原告的“
”商标在案件中予以驰名商标保护，江苏美巢公司等行为构成商标侵权及不正当竞争，判令被告赔偿原告经济损失500万元及为制止侵权行为所支付的合理开支10万元，合计510万元。
The Nanjing Intermediate People's Court fully upheld the litigation claims of the plaintiff , MACO Group, providing detailed determinations across multiple dimensions, including trademark infringement, unfair competition, joint liability, and damages calculation. The court recognized the plaintiff’s trademark "
" as entitled to well-known trademark protection in this case, affirmed that the actions of Jiangsu Meichao Company and others constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition, and ordered the defendants to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses of 5,000,000 yuan and reasonable expenses of 100,000 yuan incurred to stop the infringement, totaling 5,100,000 yuan.
同时，法院还判令三被告于十五日内停止使用包含“美巢”字样的企业名称，并公开刊登声明以消除不良影响。
Simultaneously, the court further ordered the three defendants to cease using the enterprise names containing the characters "美巢" within fifteen days and to publicly publish a statement to eliminate adverse effects.
案件意义
Case Significance
本案为保护驰名商标的合法权益提供了明确的法律依据，同时也为企业如何防范商标侵权及不正当竞争行为给予了重要警示。本案还充分体现了司法机关在处理类似案件时的严格态度，在法定赔偿额范围内予以顶额判罚，起到了强有力的震慑作用。
This case provides a clear legal basis for protecting the legitimate rights and interests of well-known trademarks, while also delivering important warnings to enterprises on how to prevent acts of trademark infringement and unfair competition. This case also fully demonstrates the strict attitude of judicial authorities in handling similar cases, awarding maximum damages permissible within the statutory range, to exert a powerful deterrent effect.
集佳新闻：
集佳荣登 MIP 2025 知识产权之星（IP STARS）多个领域榜单
Unitalen Honored in Rankings of Multiple Fields of MIP 2025 IP STARS
近日，全球领先的知识产权媒体《知识产权管理》（MIP）公布2025知识产权之星（IP STARS）各项领域排行榜，集佳知识产权再次荣登“专利申请”“专利争议解决”“商标申请”“商标争议解决”四大领域推荐榜单。同时，集佳因连续十年以上在IP STARS榜单的优异成绩，获评“10+ YEARS IP STARS”称号。
Recently, Managing Intellectual Property (MIP), a leading global intellectual property publication, announced its 2025 IP STARS rankings across various fields. Unitalen was recognized in the recommended lists for all four key fields: “patent applications”, “patent disputes”, “trademark applications”, and “trademark disputes”. Meanwhile, in recognition of its outstanding performance on the lists of the IP STARS for more than ten consecutive years, Unitalen was also awarded the "10+ YEARS IP STARS" accolade.
同时，李德山副所长、武树辰律师、侯玉静律师和孙长龙律师因其在各自领域的卓越表现和高度影响力，获评2025 IP Stars。
Meanwhile, Vice President LI Deshan, Attorneys WU Shuchen, HOU Yujing and SUN Changlong won 2025 IP Stars for their outstanding performance and high influence in their respective fields.
集佳荣列Asia IP 2025商标调查评选第一梯队
Unitalen Selected as Tier-1 Firm of Asia IP Trademark Survey 2025
近日，国际权威知识产权杂志《亚洲知识产权》（Asia IP）2025年商标调查评选结果揭晓，集佳在商标争议解决和商标申请两项业务排名中均入选中国区第一梯队。
Recently, the internationally recognized intellectual property journal Asia IP announced its 2025 trademark survey results. Unitalen was selected as a Tier 1 Firm in China for both trademark disputes and trademark applications.
集佳律所上海分所获选设立上海市首家知识产权海外公共服务站
Unitalen Shanghai Branch Selected to Establish First Overseas Intellectual Property Public Service Station of Shanghai
近日，上海市静安区知识产权局正式授予北京市集佳律师事务所上海分所“静安区知识产权海外公共服务站”牌匾，设立上海市首个知识产权海外公共服务站。此次授牌仪式标志着集佳在知识产权国际化服务领域的专业实力获得高度认可，为静安区知识产权海外保护工作增添新动能。
Recently, the Intellectual Property Administration of Jing’an District, Shanghai, officially presented the plaque for the “Jing’an District Overseas Intellectual Property Public Service Station” to the Unitalen Shanghai Branch, establishing Shanghai’s first overseas intellectual property public service station.The plaque presentation ceremony marked a high-level endorsement of Unitalen's expertise in the field of international intellectual property services and injected fresh momentum into overseas intellectual property protection efforts in Jing'an District.
集佳入围中国湖南省海外知识产权纠纷应对指导合作服务机构
Unitalen Selected as Cooperative Service Institution for Overseas Intellectual Property Dispute Response Guidance in Hunan Province, China
2025年7月2日，湖南省知识产权保护中心保护专家培训暨座谈会在长沙召开。作为湖南省海外知识产权纠纷应对指导合作服务机构，北京集佳知识产权代理有限公司受邀出席此次会议。会上，湖南省知识产权保护中心主任郭科技、副主任龙建伟为北京集佳等入围的合作服务机构举行授牌仪式。
On July 2, 2025, the Hunan National Intellectual Property Protection Center convened a training seminar for protection experts in Changsha. As the Cooperative Service Institution for Overseas Intellectual Property Dispute Response Guidance in Hunan Province, Unitalen Attorneys At Law was invited to attend the seminar. During the seminar, Director GUO Keji and Deputy Director LONG Jianwei of the Hunan National Intellectual Property Protection Center held a plaque presentation ceremony for Unitalen and other selected cooperative service institutions.
集佳合伙人赵雷律师应邀在欧洲商标协会（ECTA）第43届年会发言
Unitalen Partner and Attorney, ZHAO Lei, Invited to Speak at 43rd Annual Conference of European Communities Trademark Association (ECTA)
当地时间2025年6月18日，欧洲商标协会（ECTA）第43届年会以一场与美洲知识产权协会（ASIPI）联合举办的会议拉开序幕，集佳合伙人赵雷律师应邀参加主题发言，与来自英国、美国、墨西哥、秘鲁的行业专家共同探讨主要司法管辖区商标保护的差异，为商标权人在全球各地的商标保护提供务实的应对策略。
On June 18, 2025 (local time), the 43rd Annual Conference of the European Communities Trademark Association (ECTA) kicked off with a joint session co-organized by the Inter-American Association of Intellectual Property (ASIPI). Unitalen Partner and Attorney, ZHAO Lei, was invited to participate in the keynote speech and discuss trademark protection disparities across major jurisdictions alongside industry experts from the United Kingdom, United States, Mexico, and Peru, providing pragmatic strategies for trademark holders to protect their trademarks globally.
.jpg)