I. Case Summary in 3 Minutes

• 2003: Yanzhiwu registered the "Yanzhiwu" trademark (Class 29: Edible bird's nest).
• 2014: Yanzhichu was established and applied for the "Yanzhichu" trademark (Class 30: Rock sugar bird's nest).
• 2017–2022: Mixed outcomes in administrative proceedings; the Supreme People's Court retried and reversed the judgment in 2022, ruling the two trademarks similar.
• 2024: Yanzhiwu filed a civil lawsuit.
• January 2026: Fujian Higher People's Court's final judgment: Infringement established; Yanzhichu ordered to pay 10 million yuan in compensation and discontinue the trade name.

Core Judgment Points

1. Cross-class protection of well-known trademarks: "Yanzhiwu" has been recognized as a well-known trademark, preventing subsequent trademarks from free-riding.
2. Trade name also constitutes infringement: Both companies are based in Xiamen with overlapping business scopes, showing obvious subjective intent to free-ride.
3. Compensation amount: Based on Yanzhichu's cumulative sales of approximately 265 million yuan from 2014 to 2023, the full claim of 10 million yuan was supported.

II. Why Does "One-Character Difference" Count as Infringement?

1. Similarity judgment ≠ mere one-character difference: The two trademarks are highly similar in form, pronunciation, and meaning, making it difficult for consumers to distinguish within 3 seconds.
2. Backing of well-known trademark: Cross-class protection + enhanced protection result in lower judicial tolerance for confusion.
3. Evidence of actual confusion: Mislinked e-commerce platform pages, customer service consultation records, and consumer surveys were all admitted by the court, proving market confusion.

III. For Operators: The Era of Edge-Cutting Is Over

1. Sharp rise in compensation: 10 million yuan accounts for approximately 18% of Yanzhichu's net profit over 10 years, wiping it out in one go.
2. Trade names are no longer safe: Even with a trademark certificate, intentional free-riding when registering a trade name constitutes unfair competition; Yanzhichu was forced to rename to "Yanhongji", with an estimated additional 8 million yuan required to replace store images, packaging, and outlets.
3. Capital votes with feet: Within 30 days of the judgment, new applications for "Yanzhi×" -style names dropped by 72%; many investment institutions have included "intellectual property health" as a veto item, directly excluding projects with name edge-cutting risks.

IV. For Consumers: What Costs Are Saved?

1. Reduced search costs: Bird's nest is a low-involvement, high-price product; 63% of consumers choose brands based on form and pronunciation within 3 seconds. The proliferation of similar brands would force users to repeatedly compare origins, approvals, and reviews, drastically increasing decision-making costs.
2. Reduced safety risks: Yanzhichu engaged in OEM business without registering trademarks but extensively labeled products. The court found it closely associated with well-known trademark products and overlapping channels, easily misleading the public. After the judgment, Tmall and JD.com have removed over 40 "Yanzhi×" edge-cutting stores, purifying supply sources.
3. Strengthened "well-known trademark = quality" mindset: The judgment received 230 million media exposures, with the search index for "well-known trademark" surging by 480% in one day, allowing consumers to "trust at a glance".

V. For the Industry: Bird's Nest Track Enters Compliance Elimination Period

1. Increased brand concentration: The industry's CR5 is less than 35%, with a large number of small OEM factories surviving on labeling and edge-cutting. Proactive rights protection by leading brands will accelerate the clearance of low-end production capacity.
2. Changes in platform traffic rules: Tmall revised its standards, requiring bird's nest brands to submit registration certificates and ownership commitments, with search weighting for well-known trademarks; Douyin included intellectual property compliance in whitelist reviews, tilting traffic dividends toward genuine brands.
3. Supply chain OEMs take sides: Yanzhichu once provided OEM services for over 30 brands; some customers terminated cooperation due to concerns about joint liability. Distributors generally require OEMs to issue non-infringement legal opinions and FTO reports, making intellectual property compliance a hard threshold for securing orders.

VI. Treat Trademarks as Strategic Assets, Not Just Registration Formalities

• During registration: Full-class layout across 45 categories, associated trademarks, and defensive trademarks are indispensable;
• During operation: Advertising, public relations, public welfare, and honors are all "visibility evidence" for future rights protection;
• When infringement is discovered: Timely fix evidence, file combined lawsuits with multiple causes of action to increase compensation;
• Capital path: Incorporate intellectual property into valuation, accrue risk reserves in advance, and avoid disrupting the listing rhythm due to a single lawsuit.