Recently, Lao Yang from Putui Intellectual Property helped a netizen search whether a trademark name was similar to existing marks in a specific class. Lao Yang consistently conducts detailed multi-layered searches for every inquiry, providing screenshots and specific explanations—not just a simple “low” or “medium” risk assessment.
After analysis, Lao Yang concluded the name was highly similar to an existing trademark. The netizen disagreed: “They look clearly different! The pronunciation isn’t the same, and the meanings are distinct too.”
Lao Yang’s Explanation:
Trademarks exist to identify and distinguish goods/services. Consumers first see them with their eyes. Thus, visual similarity (shape/characters) takes priority. The two marks differed by just one stroke in the first character—making them highly similar.
Last year, a client applied for a three-character trademark where one character had a different radical (at least three strokes distinct). It was rejected. Years ago, it might have passed, but standards are stricter now.
Real-World Examples:
- Kangshuaifu (康帅傅) vs. Master Kong (康师傅)
- Ray-B (雷碧) vs. Sprite (雪碧)
- Dayao (大窑) vs. Dajiao (大窖)
Despite different sounds/meanings, these are deemed highly similar due to visual resemblance.
In 2023, “Niao Su Beer” (鸟苏) infringed “Wu Su Beer” (乌苏), resulting in ¥2.08 million in damages—all because the first character differed by a single dot (鸟 vs. 乌).