Beijing IP Court Rules in Favor of Bulgari in Snake Head Trademark Infringement Case

On April 1, 2021, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court delivered a significant ruling in a trademark dispute involving the renowned luxury brand Bulgari. The court found that the trademark No. 15911982, registered by Rongjun Liu and depicting a snake head design, infringed Bulgari’s copyright in its original snake head artwork.

Bulgari initially filed a request for invalidation of Liu’s trademark with the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA). On April 28, 2019, CNIPA issued decision ShangPingZi (2019) No. 88366, rejecting Bulgari’s claim. CNIPA held that Bulgari had not provided sufficient evidence to prove ownership of the copyright in the snake head design. Consequently, CNIPA concluded that the trademark registration did not violate Article 32 of the 2014 Trademark Law, which prohibits trademark applications that infringe on existing prior rights.

Dissatisfied with CNIPA’s ruling, Bulgari appealed to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court. Upon review, the court found compelling evidence supporting Bulgari’s copyright claims. The court’s findings included four key points: first, the snake head design qualifies as a work of fine art protected under Chinese copyright law; second, Bulgari is the rightful copyright owner with rights predating the filing of Liu’s trademark application; third, Liu had the opportunity to access Bulgari’s design due to its public promotion; and fourth, the disputed trademark closely resembles Bulgari’s design in overall shape, graphic elements, and visual impression, constituting substantial similarity.

Based on these findings, the court held that Liu’s trademark registration infringed Bulgari’s prior copyright and therefore invalidated the trademark No. 15911982.

The court’s application of these four tests aligns with common judicial standards in China for determining whether a trademark infringes on prior copyright. This ruling underscores the importance of copyright protection as a basis for challenging trademark registrations that replicate artistic designs.

This case highlights the intersection of trademark and copyright law in China and affirms the legal protections available to luxury brands against unauthorized use of distinctive design elements.

Legal practitioners and brand owners should note the evidentiary standards applied by the Beijing Intellectual Property Court in establishing copyright ownership and infringement in trademark disputes.

This ruling serves as a precedent for future cases involving the validity of figurative trademarks that incorporate artistic works protected under copyright law.