Michael Jordan wins China court ruling after years-long case

Image
AP Beijing
Last Updated : Dec 08 2016 | 12:48 PM IST
China's highest court today ruled in favor of basketball legend Michael Jordan at the culmination of a years-long case over use of the Chinese rendering of his globally-known name and trademark.
The former NBA star has been in dispute with a sportswear company based in southern China called Qiaodan Sports since 2012.
He had previously argued unsuccessfully in Beijing courts that they had used his Chinese name "Qiaodan" by which he has been known since he gained widespread popularity in the mid-1980s, his old jersey number 23 and basketball player logo to make it look like he was associated with their brand.
The Supreme People's Court today announced that it was overturning two rulings by Beijing courts against Jordan from 2014 and 2015 that had found there wasn't sufficient evidence to support the athlete's allegations over the use of his image.
It also ordered the trademark bureau to issue a new ruling over the use of the Chinese characters in the brand name "Qiaodan."
Pronounced "CHEEOW-dan," it is the transliteration of "Jordan" in Mandarin.
The court's judgment was broadcast live on its website. Jordan said in a statement that millions of Chinese fans and consumers had always known him by the name Qiaodan and that he was happy the court had recognized his right to protect his name.
"Chinese consumers deserve to know that Qiaodan Sports and its products have no connection to me. Nothing is more important than protecting your own name, and today's decision shows the importance of that principle," Jordan said.
In a twist to the legal saga, Qiaodan Sports successfully counter-sued Jordan in 2013 for preventing it from pursuing a stock market listing because of the trademark lawsuit.
The Beijing law firm representing Qiaodan Sports Co. Ltd. declined to comment. The case reflects the difficulties faced by foreign individuals and companies in protecting their copyrights in China, where domestic firms have long taken a cavalier attitude toward intellectual property.
Numerous Chinese companies sell products with names that sound suspiciously similar to well-known foreign brands, often with only one or two letters changed.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Dec 08 2016 | 12:48 PM IST

Next Story