中国国家知识产权局关于商标代理机构重新备案审核结果的公告（第529号）
Announcement of CNIPA on the Review Results of the Re-filing of Trademark Agencies (No. 529)
国家知识产权局公告
Announcement of CNIPA
第五二九号
No. 529
根据《中华人民共和国商标法实施条例》《商标代理监督管理规定》有关规定，按照《国家知识产权局关于商标代理机构重新备案的公告》（第五〇七号）有关要求，国家知识产权局已组织完成重新备案。现就有关事项公告如下：
In accordance with the relevant provisions of the Regulation on the Implementation of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China and Provisions on Supervision and Administration of Trademark Agency, and the related requirements of the Announcement of the China National Intellectual Property Administration on Re-registration of Trademark Agencies (No. 507), the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) has organized and completed the re-registration. The relevant matters are hereby announced as follows:
一、2023年1月1日至3月31日，国家知识产权局组织开展商标代理机构重新备案工作。经审核，提交重新备案的商标代理机构中共有16921家符合要求，审核结果已通过邮件发送，具体名单详见“中国商标网>商标代理”栏目，供社会公众查询。
I. From January 1 to March 31, 2023, the CNIPA organized the trademark agency re-registration work. After review, a total of 16,921 trademark agencies among those that have submitted an application for re-registration meet the requirements. The review results have been sent by mail, and the specific list is available in the “Trademark Agency" column at sbj.cnipa.gov.cn/sbj/index.html for public inquiry.
二、重新备案的有效期为三年，自重新备案通过邮件发出通过通知之日起计算。有效期届满后拟继续从事商标代理业务的，商标代理机构可以在有效期届满前六个月内办理延续备案，具体方式详见“中国商标网>商标代理>商标代理机构备案办理须知”。
II. The new registration is valid for three years, since the date of approval notice for the re-filing sent by mail. The trademark agencies intending to continue to engage in trademark agency business after the expiration of the validity period may apply for extension within six months before the expiration of the validity period. See "Instructions for Trademark Agency Re-filing" in "Trademark Agency" column at sbj.cnipa.gov.cn/sbj/index.html for more details.
三、备案商标代理从业人员信息将与商标代理业务相关联，即备案商标代理从业人员能够提交商标代理业务，签名并承担法律责任。
III. Information of trademark filing practitioners shall be associated with the trademark agency business, that is, trademark filing practitioners associated with registered trademark agencies may submit trademark applications, sign and assume legal responsibility.
四、对于未重新备案的商标代理机构，国家知识产权局将在商标网上服务系统、商标代理系统中进行标注，并不再受理其提交的商标代理业务申请，处理未办结商标代理业务的除外。商标代理机构无未办结代理业务的，国家知识产权局将注销其备案。
IV. CNIPA will mark the trademark agencies that did not re-register in the trademark online service system and the trademark agency system, and no longer accept their application for trademark agency business, except for pending trademark agency business. CNIPA will cancel the registration of the trademark agencies that did not re-register and without pending agency business.
五、未提交重新备案、重新备案未通过或注销备案的商标代理机构，如拟继续从事商标代理业务，应另行办理新备案，具体方式详见“中国商标网>商标代理>商标代理机构备案办理须知”。办理新备案时有未办结代理业务的，商标代理机构在新备案审核通过后，仍可继续办理原未办结业务，原数字证书继续有效。
V. The trademark agencies that: have not submitted re-registration applications, have failed in re-registration, or have been cancelled registration, shall apply for a new registration if they intend to continue to engage in trademark agency business. See "Instructions for Trademark Agency Re-Registration" in "Trademark Agency" column at sbj.cnipa.gov.cn/sbj/index.html for more details. For trademark agencies with pending agency business that are subject to new filing, they may continue the original pending business when the new filing is pending, and the original digital certificate continues to be valid.
特此公告。
It is hereby notified.
国家知识产权局
CNIPA
2023年4月20日
April 20, 2023
（来源：中国国家知识产权局网站）
(Source: CNIPA Website)
沙特知识产权局指定中国国家知识产权局作为PCT国际检索单位和国际初步审查单位
SAIP Designates CNIPA as PCT ISA/IPEA
根据中国国家知识产权局与沙特知识产权局关于PCT合作的意向书，经世界知识产权组织正式确认，自2023年5月1日起，中国国家知识产权局将成为沙特阿拉伯王国国民或居民或以英文或阿拉伯语（附英文翻译）提交的PCT国际专利申请的国际检索单位和国际初步审查单位（ISA/IPEA）。
Under a letter of intent on Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) cooperation between the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) and the Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property (SAIP), beginning May 1, 2023, the CNIPA has become the PCT International Searching Authority (ISA)/International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA) for international patent applications in English or Arabic (attached with English translation) submitted by nationals or residents in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which has been officially affirmed by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
有关事项将在PCT公报及相关PCT法律文件中进行公告。
Relevant details will be published in the PCT Gazette and relevant PCT legal documents.
（来源：中国国家知识产权局政务微信）
(Source: CNIPA Official WeChat Account)
中国国家版权局与世界知识产权组织合作迈上新台阶
NCAC and WIPO Take Cooperation to a New Level
4月25日，中国国家版权局与世界知识产权组织在北京更新签署了双边合作谅解备忘录，双方合作迈上新台阶。中央宣传部副部长张建春、世界知识产权组织总干事邓鸿森分别在谅解备忘录上签字。
The National Copyright Administration of China (NCAC) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) on April 25, 2023 signed an updated Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on bilateral cooperation in Beijing, taking their cooperation to a new level. Zhang Jianchun, Vice Minister of the Publicity Department of the Communist Party of China, and Daren Tang Director General of the WIPO, signed the MoU respectively.
中国国家版权局与世界知识产权组织在国际版权事务中一直相互支持、真诚合作。自2015年签署谅解备忘录以来，双方在加强国际版权交流合作方面取得丰硕成果，特别是在共同推动下，首个在中国缔结并以中国城市命名的国际知识产权条约《视听表演北京条约》于2020年4月28日正式生效，世界上迄今为止唯一一部版权领域的人权条约《关于为盲人、视力障碍者或其他印刷品阅读障碍者获得已出版作品提供便利的马拉喀什条约》于2022年5月5日在中国落地实施。
The NCAC and WIPO have been supporting each other and cooperating sincerely in international copyright affairs. Since the two sides signed the original MoU in 2015, they have made fruitful achievements in strengthening international copyright exchanges and cooperation. Through joint promotion, the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances, the first international intellectual property treaty concluded in China and named after a Chinese city, took effect on April 28, 2020, and the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled, the first and only human rights treaty within copyright so far, came into force in China on May 5, 2022.
此次更新签署谅解备忘录，旨在巩固版权领域现有交流合作的同时，拓展和加强双方在制定实施国际版权条约、探讨数字版权保护问题、提升版权产业风险防控能力、分享版权激励中小企业创造创新、推动民间文艺传承发展中国方案等方面的合作。
The updated MoU aims to consolidate the existing exchanges and cooperation in the field of copyright, expand and strengthen the bilateral cooperation in formulating and implementing international copyright treaties, discussing digital copyright protection issues, improving the risk prevention and control capacity of the copyright industry, sharing copyright to encourage creation and innovation among the small- and medium-sized enterprises, and promoting the inheritance and development of folk literature and art, and other issues.
（来源：中国知识产权资讯网）
(Source: http://www.iprchn.com)
2023年中美欧日韩五局合作副局长视频会议召开
2023 Meeting of IP5 Deputy Heads of Office Held Online
近日，2023年中美欧日韩知识产权五局合作副局长会议以视频形式召开。会议由美国专利商标局轮值主办，中国国家知识产权局副局长廖涛率团出席，美国专利商标局副局长瓦伦西娅·马丁·华莱士主持会议，欧洲专利局副局长克里斯托弗·恩斯特、日本特许厅技监桂正宪、韩国特许厅次长柳东权分别率代表团出席会议。世界知识产权组织作为观察员列席此次会议。
The 2023 meeting of IP5 Deputy Heads of Office was held via video conference recently. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) held this year's presidency. Liao Tao, Deputy Commissioner of the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) led a Chinese delegation to the meeting, which was officiated by USPTO Deputy Commissioner Valencia Martin Wallace and attended by delegations led respectively by European Patent Office (EPO)'s Vice President Christoph Ernst, Japan Patent Office (JPO)'s Deputy Commissioner Karsura Masanori, Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO)'s Vice Commissioner Ryu Donghyun. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) also sent representatives to the meeting as observers.
会上，五局副局长听取了各工作组和新兴技术/人工智能路线图合作框架下近一年来的工作进展及成果汇报，围绕五局局长系列会议的筹备、五局对可持续发展的贡献、五局愿景声明更新、项目管理、与产业界交流方式等关乎五局未来合作的重要议题进行了讨论，会议还审议了将提请五局局长批准的合作项目提案。此次会议为将于6月召开的五局局长系列会议奠定了良好基础，也将推动未来五局合作不断深入。
During the meeting, Deputy Heads of the five offices listened to working progress and reports made by different working groups and through the cooperation framework of the roadmap for new emerging technologies and artificial intelligence in the past year, and held discussion on the preparation for the IP5 Heads of Office meeting, IP5's contribution to sustainable development, update on the IP5 Joint Statement, program management, interactive mode with the industry and other crucial issues related to the IP5's future cooperation. The meeting also reviewed the cooperation projects set to be proposed for approval by the IP5 Heads of Office. Having laid a solid foundation for the upcoming June meetings of IP5 Heads, this meeting will also exert its own role in bolstering IP5 cooperation.
（来源：中国国家知识产权局网站）
(Source: CNIPA Website)
典型案例：
“金龙鱼桥米”商标侵权及不正当竞争纠纷二审一案
The Case of Second Trial of "金龙鱼桥米(Jinlongyu Bridge Rice)" Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition Dispute
关注度：★★★★★
Spotlight: ★★★★★
审理机构：湖北省高级人民法院
Hearing authority: Hubei Provincial High People's Court
案由：商标侵权及不正当竞争纠纷
Cause of action: Trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute
集佳代理：被上诉人
Unitalen representative: the appellee
案情简介
Case brief
上诉人京山市粮食行业协会拥有“京山桥米”地理标志证明商标，被上诉人经授权有权使用案外人“金龙鱼桥米”商标。上诉人与其被许可人湖北国宝桥米有限公司认为，被上诉人在被诉商品上使用“泉眼山下巧米香”“桥米源京山”“地处京山”“纳大红山脉”“成就孙桥”等标识（下称“被诉侵权标识”）足以造成对产地来源和特定品质的误认，构成对“京山桥米”证明商标的侵权。被上诉人认为，被诉侵权标识系客观真实地描述产品的出产地域、地理位置等特点的“描述性使用”，并非“商标性使用”。湖北高院经审理认为，被诉“金龙鱼桥米”商品稻谷原料确系从京山市孙桥镇收购的“桥米 537”稻谷。被诉侵权标识与“京山桥米”证明商标整体上不近似，且被上诉人已获得“金龙鱼桥米”注册商标使用授权。综合考虑主观意图、使用方式、消费者认知等因素，前述使用方式如实表述或描述其大米产品的出产地域、地理位置等特点，属于描述性使用相关文字及其图片的行为，不构成商标侵权。
Appellant Jingshan Association of Grain Sector had the certification trademark of the geographical indication "京山桥米(Jingshan Bridge Rice)", and the appellee was authorized to use the trademark "金龙鱼桥米(Jinlongyu Bridge Rice)" of the person not involved in the case. The appellant and its licensee, Hubei National Treasure Bridge Rice Co., Ltd. believed that the appellee's use of marks such as "泉眼山下巧米香(quan yan shan xia qiao mi xiang)", "桥米源京山(qiao mi yuan jing shan)", "地处京山(di chu jing shan)", "纳大红山脉(na da hong shan mai)", "成就孙桥(cheng jiu sun qiao)" (hereinafter referred to as "the sued infringing marks") on the sued goods is sufficient to cause misunderstanding of the source of origin and specific quality, constituting the infringement of the certification mark "京山桥米(Jingshan Bridge Rice)". The appellee argued that the sued infringing mark was "descriptive use" which objectively and truly described the characteristics of the product such as production region and geographical location, rather than "trademark use". After hearing, Hubei High People's Court held that the raw material of the "金龙鱼桥米(Jinlongyu Bridge Rice)" sued goods was indeed "Bridge Rice 537" rice purchased from Sunqiao Town, Jingshan City. The sued infringing mark as a whole is not similar to the certification mark "京山桥米(Jingshan Bridge Rice)", and the appellee had been authorized to use the registered trademark "金龙鱼桥米(Jinlongyu Bridge Rice)". Taking into account the subjective intent, using manner, consumer awareness and other factors, the aforementioned use truthfully expressed or described the production region, geographical location and other characteristics of the rice product, belonging to descriptive use of the relevant text and pictures, which did not constitute trademark infringement.
典型意义
Typical significance
本案对地理标志证明商标的正当使用进行了充分的论述。地理标志证明商标系证明某一商品来源于某地区，且该商品的特定品质主要由该地的自然环境因素所决定的标志，用以证明使用该地理标志证明商标的商品具有特定品质，达到特定标准。对于某商品并非产于该地的自然人、法人或其他组织在商品上标注该证明商标的，商标权人有权加以禁止，并追究其侵害证明商标的责任。证明商标的保护有其特殊性，但作为注册商标与普通商标一样，仍适用《商标法》的一般规定，其注册商标权利人同样无权禁止他人正当使用其商标中所包含的地名或者其他表示商品质量、原料及特点的名称。
This case provides a full discussion on the proper use of the geographical indication certification mark. The geographical indication certification mark refers to a mark certifying the place of origin of the goods of which the special quality is primarily determined by the natural conditions of the location involved and is used to prove that the goods using the geographical indication certification mark has special quality and meets special standards. The trademark owner has the right to prohibit natural persons, legal persons or other organizations from marking the certification trademark on the goods that are not produced from such region, and to pursue the infringement responsibility of the certification trademark. The protection of a certification mark has its own special characteristics, but as a registered trademark, like ordinary trademarks, the certification mark is still subject to general provisions of the Trademark Law, and the registered trademark right holder thereof also has no right to prohibit others from properly using the names of places or other names that indicate the quality, raw materials and characteristics of goods contained in the trademark.
金沙窖酒公司与金沙古酒公司、金沙安底斗酒公司、山东嘿豆公司商标侵权案
Trademark Infringement Case Between Jinsha Cellar Wine Company and Jinsha Gu Liquor Company, Jinsha Andi Dou Liquor Company, and Shandong Heidou Company
关注度：★★★★★
Spotlight: ★★★★★
审理机构：山东省高级人民法院
Hearing authority: Shandong Provincial High People's Court
案由：侵害商标权及不正当竞争纠纷
Cause of action: Trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute
集佳代理：金沙窖酒 (上诉人-原审原告）
Unitalen representative: Jinsha Cellar Wine Company （Appellant-plaintiff in the original trial)
案情简介
Case brief
各方均提起上诉。原审被告金沙安底斗酒公司、金沙古酒公司在其生产、销售的白酒商品上使用了“金沙古沙”标识，被上诉人山东嘿豆公司销售了上述被诉侵权商品。一审法院经审理认为，上述“金沙古沙”标识的使用构成商标侵权。原审被告不服，向山东高院提出上诉认为：（1）“金沙回沙酒”商标含有“金沙”地名及酿酒特定环节的通用名称，不具有显著性；（2）被诉“金沙古沙”标识系正当使用，金沙窖酒公司无权禁止；（3）涉案商标已成为地理标志，进入公有领域，不具备商标权保护条件。山东高院则认为：（1）金沙回沙酒作为白酒商标指示商品来源的作用已经明显高于其作为地名及酿酒特定环节取得的酒的通用名称的知名度，金沙回沙酒作为白酒商标已经通过长期使用取得了较高的显著性。（2）“金沙古沙”标识的使用明显超出了描述性说明被诉商品来源与金沙产区并采取相应酿造工艺的使用方式，系商标性使用，正当使用抗辩不成立。（3）涉案商标为地理标志，公共资源，不受商标法保护缺乏法律依据。
All parties filed an appeal. The defendant in the original trial Jinsha Andi Dou Liquor Company and Jinsha Gu Liquor Company, used the mark "金沙古沙(Jinsha Gusha)" on the liquor goods they produced and sold, and the appellee, Shandong Heidou Company, sold the above sued infringing goods. After hearing, the court of first instance held that the use of the mark "金沙古沙(Jinsha Gusha)" constituted trademark infringement. The defendant in the original trial was not satisfied, and appealed to Shandong High People's Court, arguing that: (1) the trademark "金沙回沙酒(Jinsha Hui Sha Jiu)" contained the name of the place "金沙(Jinsha)" and the generic name of a specific part of the brewing process, and was not distinctive; (2) the mark "金沙古沙(Jinsha Gusha)" was used properly, and Jinsha Cellar Wine Company had no right to prohibit; and (3) the trademark involved had become a geographical indication, and entered the public domain, which did not have the conditions for trademark protection. Shandong High People's Court held that: (1) the role of Jinsha Huisha liquor as a liquor trademark indicating the source of goods had been significantly greater than its popularity as a place name and the generic name of wine obtained in a specific part of the brewing process, and Huisha liquor as a liquor trademark had achieved a high degree of prominence through long-term use. (2) The use of the mark "金沙古沙(Jinsha Gusha)" was clearly beyond the descriptive use that described the source of the goods and the Jinsha production region and the corresponding brewing process, which was trademark use, and the defense of proper use was not established. (3) The trademark involved was a geographical indication and belonged to the public resource. The argument that it shall not be protected by the trademark law lacks legal basis.
典型意义
Typical significance
本案充分论述了含有地名、通用名称权利商标的显著性问题，商标是否具有显著性，本质在于是否能够起到识别商品来源的作用，而非仅进行形式上的简单判断。并且，法院对被诉标识的使用属于商标性使用，还是描述性合理使用进行了准确的区分。本案原审原告及法院均未禁止原审被告正当使用“金沙”地名以及相应的酿酒工艺通用名称，只是要求在原审原告已经存在较为知名的权利商标情况下，被告使用“金沙”地名及相应的酿酒工艺通用名称时，应当遵循诚实信用原则，不得侵害他人在先权利。但本案原审被告明显突破了描述性合理使用的范围，将被诉标识予以突出，放大，构成商标性使用，构成商标侵权。此外，注册商标的商品，被认定为地理标志，并不当然影响注册商标专用权的行使。
The case fully discusses the distinctiveness of trademarks containing place names and generic names. The essence of whether a trademark is distinctive lies in whether it can play the role of identifying the source of goods, rather than just making a simple judgment on the form. Moreover, the court made a precise distinction between the use of the sued mark as trademark use, or fair descriptive use. Neither of the plaintiff and the court in the original trial of this case prohibited the defendant from properly using the place name "金沙(Jinsha)" and the corresponding generic name of the brewing process, but only required that the defendant shall follow the principle of honesty and credit when using the place name "金沙(Jinsha)" and the corresponding generic name of the brewing process in the case where the plaintiff already has been a well-known trademark, and should not infringe the prior rights of others. However, the defendant in this case obviously broke through the scope of fair descriptive use by highlighting and enlarging the sued mark, which constituted trademark use and trademark infringement. In addition, the goods with registered trademark being recognized as geographical indications does not ipso facto affect the exercise of the exclusive right of the registered trademark.
集佳新闻：
集佳代理3个案件入选北京商标协会2022年度商标诉讼与非诉典型案例
Three Cases Represented by Unitalen Selected into Typical Cases of Trademark Litigation and Non-litigation in 2022 by Beijing Trademark Association
4月21日，在第23个世界知识产权日到来之际，北京商标协会发布2022年度“商标十大诉讼典型案例”和“商标十大非诉典型案例”，集佳代理的3个案件入选，分别是：
On April 21, on the occasion of the 23rd World Intellectual Property Day, Beijing Trademark Association released the "Top 10 Typical Cases of Trademark Litigation" and "Top 10 Typical Cases of Trademark Non-Litigation" in 2022, and three cases represented by Unitalen were selected, namely:
2022年度商标十大诉讼典型案例
Top 10 typical cases of trademark litigation in 2022
“北辰阳光城”商标侵权及不正当竞争案
"North Star Sunshine City" trademark infringement and unfair competition case
2022年度商标十大非诉典型案例
Top 10 Typical Cases of Trademark Non-Litigation in 2022
“LAURA BIAGIOTTI”商标异议案
"LAURA BIAGIOTTI" trademark dispute case
“LIQUI MOLY”商标行政查处案
"LIQUI MOLY" trademark administrative investigation and disposal case
2022年度集佳律师事务所十大知识产权典型案例
Top 10 Typical IP Cases of Unitalen Law Firm in 2022
在第23个“世界知识产权日”到来之际，北京市集佳律师事务所精心挑选出十大知识产权典型案例，涉及商标侵权、专利侵权、著作权侵权、不正当竞争等各个领域，为与之类似案件提供了可资借鉴的维权范本。
On the occasion of the 23rd "World Intellectual Property Day", Beijing Unitalen Law Firm has carefully selected ten typical IP cases, involving various fields such as trademark infringement, patent infringement, copyright infringement and unfair competition, which provide models for similar cases to be used as a reference for the protection of rights.
Top1 “一品石”商标侵权及著作权侵权互诉两案
Top 1 Two cases of "一品石(Yi Pin Shi)" mutual trademark infringement and copyright infringement lawsuits
Top2 花花牛商标侵权及不正当竞争互诉三案
Top 2 Three cases of mutual trademark infringement and unfair competition lawsuits concerning Hua Hua Niu
Top3 “金龙鱼桥米”商标侵权及不正当竞争纠纷二审一案
Top 3 Case of second trial of "金龙鱼桥米(Jinlongyu Bridge Rice)" trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute
Top4 “圣象”无效宣告行政诉讼案件
Top 4 Case of "圣象(Sheng Xiang)" invalidation administrative litigation
Top5 福建检察院“周六福”商标侵权及不正当竞争纠纷再审抗诉两案件
Top 5 Two cases of counterappeal against review concerning "Zhou Liu Fu" trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute by Fujian Procuratorate
Top 6 Case of Hunan Broadcasting System responding to lawsuit of "声临其境(sheng lin qi jing)" trademark infringement
Top7 金沙窖酒公司与金沙古酒公司、金沙安底斗酒公司、山东嘿豆公司商标侵权案
Top 7 Trademark infringement case between Jinsha Cellar Wine Company and Jinsha Gu Liquor Company, Jinsha Andi Dou Liquor Company, and Shandong Heidou Company
Top8 成都阿朗公司与国家知识产权局、北京卓良公司等发明专利无效行政纠纷案
Top 8 Case of administrative dispute on invalidation of patent for invention between Chengdu Alang Company, CNIPA, and Beijing Zulin Company, et al.
Top 9 A series of cases of patent infringement and request for invalidation between Zhongdian Boson v. Hefei SunPure
Top10 浙江三花智能控制股份有限公司vs.浙江某公司韩国专利维权案件
Top 10 Case of right protection of the Korean patent between Zhejiang Sanhua Intelligent Control Co., Ltd. vs. a Zhejiang company
集佳代理“花花牛商标权属纠纷案”入选2022年河南法院知识产权司法保护十件典型案例
The Case of Unitalen Representing "Hua Hua Niu Trademark Ownership Dispute" Selected into the Ten Typical Cases of IP Judicial Protection by Henan Court in 2022
2023年4月25日，河南高院发布2022年度河南法院知识产权司法保护十大典型案例，集佳律所代理的“河南花花牛乳业集团股份有限公司与河南郑牛生物科技有限公司等商标权属纠纷案”荣誉入选！
On April 25, 2023, Henan High People's Court released the Top Ten Typical Cases of IP Judicial Protection of Henan Court in 2022, and the case of "Dispute over Trademark Ownership between Hua Hua Niu Dairy Group Co., Ltd. and Henan Zhengniu Biotechnology Co., Ltd. et al." represented by Unitalen was selected!
相关阅读：Unitalen Client HuaHuaNiu Won Three Civil Cases Concerning Trademark Right Confirmation
Read more: Unitalen Client HuaHuaNiu Won Three Civil Cases Concerning Trademark Right Confirmation
集佳代理腾讯维权案入选长沙法院知识产权司法保护典型案例（2018年~2022年）
Unitalen Representing Tencent's Rights Protection Case Selected into Typical Cases of IP Judicial Protection (2018-2022) by Changsha Court
近日，长沙中院通报2018年至2022年长沙法院知识产权司法保护状况，并发布二十个典型案例。集佳代理的“原告腾讯科技（成都）有限公司、深圳市腾讯计算机系统有限公司与被告湖北省极炫网络科技有限公司、湖北省极利网络科技有限公司、长沙七丽网络科技有限公司不正当竞争纠纷案”〔长沙市开福区人民法院 (2021)湘0105民初11329号〕入选长沙法院知识产权司法保护典型案例（2018年~2022年）。
Recently, Changsha Intermediate People's Court informed the IP judicial protection status of Changsha court from 2018 to 2022 and released twenty typical cases. The case of Unitalen representing "(Plaintiff) Tencent Technology (Chengdu) Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Tencent Computer System Co., Ltd. Against (Defendant) Hubei Jixuan Network Technology Co., Ltd., Hubei Jili Network Technology Co., Ltd., and Changsha Qili Network Technology Co., Ltd. Concerning Unfair Competition Dispute" [Changsha Kaifu District People's Court (2021) Xiang 0105 Min Chu No. 11329] was selected into Typical Cases of IP Judicial Protection (2018-2022) by Changsha Court.
本案是首例对游戏租号行为作出诉前行为保全的案件，本案还曾入选最高人民法院发布的2021年中国法院50件典型知识产权案例、湖南法院2021年度知识产权司法保护典型案例、2021年度国际知识产权保护协会（AIPPI）中国分会版权十大热点案件和2021年度中国网络治理十大司法案件。
This is the first case of pre-litigation behavior preservation for game account rental. This case was selected into 50 typical IP cases of Chinese courts in 2021 released by the Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China, Typical Cases of IP Judicial Protection of 2021 by Hunan Court, the 2021 Top Ten Hot Copyright Cases of the International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (IAPIP) China and the 2021 Top Ten Judicial Cases of China's Internet Governance.
紫光展锐公司授予集佳“2022年度合作优秀事务所”荣誉称号
Unitalen Awarded "2022 Outstanding Cooperation Firm" by UNISOC
2023年4月26日是第23个世界知识产权日，紫光展锐（上海）科技有限公司知识产权团队专程访问集佳上海分所，授予集佳“2022年度合作优秀事务所” 荣誉称号，并颁发表彰纪念奖杯。
On April 26, 2023, the 23rd World Intellectual Property Day, the IP team of UNISOC (Shanghai) Technology Co., Ltd. paid a special visit to Unitalen Shanghai branch, and awarded Unitalen the honor of "2022 Outstanding Cooperation Firm" and presented a commemorative trophy.
集佳9位资深商标代理人入选2023年商标人才库高级人才库
Nine Senior Trademark Attorneys of Unitalen Selected for 2023 Senior Trademark Talent Pool
5月8日，中华商标协会“2023年商标人才库入库申报（第一批）高级合格人员名单”公布，集佳9位资深商标代理人获评商标高级人才。
On May 8, the China Trademark Association published the "Senior Qualified List (First Batch) for 2023 Trademark Talent Pool Entry Declaration", and nine senior trademark attorneys of Unitalen were evaluated as senior trademark talents.
集佳入选高级人才名单（按笔画顺序排列）：
List of selected senior talents of Unitalen (in Chinese stroke order):
于泽辉、田达良、李永波、李擘、陈绍娟、赵雷、黄波、银静、黎琳
YU Zehui, TIAN Daliang, LI Yongbo, LI Bo, CHEN Shaojuan, ZHAO Lei, HUANG Bo, YIN Jing, and LI Lin
.jpg)