China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

China Releases Typical Cases of IPR Law Enforcement to Strengthen Protection of Olympic Symbols

Mon, 13 Jun 2022
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 21 Apr. 2022, China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SMAR) released twenty typical cases involving IPR law enforcement.

These cases involve trademark infringement, patent counterfeiting, disturbing the order of trademark agency market by improper means, bad-faith applications for trademark registration, conducting patent agency business without licenses and other illegal acts.

Among them, two cases involve the protection of exclusive rights to Olympic symbols.

In these two cases, Nanjing Jianbo Protective Equipment Co., Ltd. sold masks with Olympic symbols without authorization, and Chongqing Fuling Zhacai Group Co., Ltd. published pictures containing the “Tokyo Olympics” on its social media platforms and websites without the authorization of the right holder of the Olympic symbols.

China’s law enforcement authorities believed that the aforementioned acts had infringed the exclusive rights of Olympic symbols, and the parties involved shall be imposed corresponding administrative penalties.

According to the “Regulations on the Protection of Olympic Symbols”, the five Olympic rings, Olympic flag, Olympic motto, Olympic emblem, Olympic anthem of the International Olympic Committee and exclusive expressions such as Olympic, Olympia, and Olympic Games and the abbreviations thereof are all Olympic symbols and are protected by law. No one may use Olympic symbols for commercial purposes without the authorization of the right holders of the Olympic symbols.

 

 

Cover Photo by Yingchih on Unsplash

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

You might also like

Guangdong High Court Highlights Landmark Mainland-Hong Kong Bankruptcy Ruling

Among 10 typical cases released by the Guangdong High People's Court to advance legal alignment in the Greater Bay Area, a landmark ruling (Re Guangdong Overseas Construction Corporation) stands out for securing Hong Kong judicial recognition for a bankruptcy administrator appointed by a mainland court outside designated pilot regions.

China Publishes First Typical Cases in Sports Arbitration

China Commission of Arbitration for Sports (CCAS) has released its first set of six typical cases, establishing a precedent, among others, that sports agency contract disputes fall under specialized sports arbitration rather than general commercial arbitration.

China Designates Beijing Court for ICSID Arbitral Awards

China has officially designated the Beijing No. 4 Intermediate People's Court to handle the recognition and enforcement of ICSID awards, filling a long-standing procedural gap and advancing its restrictive immunity framework.

PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal, Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments

Recent Australian case law clarifies that the “double interest” mechanism in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) monetary judgments functions as a compensatory post-judgment interest framework rather than an unenforceable penalty. This consolidates Australia’s position as a highly attractive and creditor-friendly forum for enforcing Chinese judgments. See Zhengzhou Lvdu Real Estate Group Co v Shu [2024] NSWSC 58 (6 February 2024), Fu v Pang [2025] VSC 597 (16 September 2025)