The Beijing No 1 Intermediate People's Court yesterday ruled in
favour of two US companies in separate disputes over the use of
domain names.
Beijing-based Guowang Information Corporation (www.cinet.com.cn)
was ordered to cancel its domain name www.dupont.com.cn, which it
registered with the China Internet Network Information Centre in
1998, because it "violated the exclusive rights" of US firm Dupont,
according to the court.
The court also ordered the Beijing Tide Electronic Group
(www.tide.com.cn) to stop using its domain name because of a
similar problem alleged by company Procter and Gamble.
The two cases are among the recent upsurge in disputes arising from
the use of domain names. Sources with the court said such cases are
mainly in Beijing and Shanghai. So far, more than 10 cases have
been handled in the two cities.
Because of a lack of specific laws relating to such disputes, there
have been arguments as to how these cases should be tried,
officials said.
The judges in yesterday's two cases used the Trademark Law and the
Anti-Unfair Competition Law, contending that both Dupont and Tide
are "reputed" trademarks and that registering them as domain names
is unfair.
"Reputed trademarks enjoy high business value," said the court.
"Even if they are used in unrelated products and services, there
may still be misleading and confusing effects for consumers that
will negatively affect the original value of the trademarks."
"We do not think that Guowang has violated the Trademark Law," said
firm lawyer Shu Ziping. "No clause in the law stipulates that
registering trademarks as domain names is a violation of rights.
Besides, Guowang and Dupont are not in the same business."
Guowang, a company providing Internet services, has been brought to
court by seven international companies over similar allegations. It
has already lost three cases.
Shu said yesterday that the company will appeal to a higher court
over the latest case.
"Domain names have some features of intellectual property so we
judge them using the same regulations," said Luo Dongchuan, judge
in the Guowang case. "Also, when we ruled that Guowang had violated
the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, we emphasized the principle of
good faith and fair competition."
(China Daily 11/22/2000)