Order of the President of the People's Republic of China

No. 50

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.

The President of the People's Republic of China, Xi Jinping

June 27, 2025

(Source: website of the National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China)

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.

For more project outcomes, please visit the official website: https://id-five.org.

Appendix 1: Original English Version of the Informative User Guide for the View and Drawing Requirements of Designs

(Source: website of the CNIPA)

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.

(Source: website of the CNIPA)

Case Brief

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.

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.

Court Judgment

 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.

Case Significance

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.

Case Brief

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.

Second Instance Defense

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. 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.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.

Second Instance Judgment

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.

Case Significance

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.

Case Brief

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.

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.

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.

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.

Court Opinion

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.

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.

Case Significance

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.