The "green peppercorns" need a brand defense war

Keyou Fu (Executive Director of PerChon Brand Value Research Institute)

Recently, a Shanghai catering company launched a lawsuit in many places in China, claiming that the relevant restaurants infringed its "green pepper" trademark and demanded compensation for losses, including a number of Sichuan merchants. After the media exposure, public opinion was in a big uproar, and it was criticized as a malicious lawsuit, and soon the business concerned apologized and withdrew all the lawsuits.

Is that the end of it? Not really. The Sichuan Condiment Association and the Sichuan Hot Pot Association subsequently issued statements saying that green peppercorns should not be registered as trademarks, and an invalidation application will be filed, and will be jointly with relevant associations in Chongqing to protect the green peppercorn industry.

This is a good thing. The boiling "green pepper" incident did not end without a problem, but finally came to the right track, that is, the track of brand thinking. Because the "green peppers" need to launch a brand defense war.

Visual China map

The "green pepper" incident caused controversy

Trademark is an important brand asset of a business. When the "green pepper" is successfully registered, it undoubtedly becomes the brand asset of a catering company in Shanghai, representing the brand image of the enterprise and condensing the brand value of the enterprise. But it's a controversial brand equity.

According to the Provisions of the Trademark Law, if there is only the generic name, graphic or model of the goods, which only directly indicates the quality, main raw materials, functions, uses, weights, quantities and other characteristics of the goods, as well as other characteristics that lack distinctive features, they shall not be registered as trademarks.

Then, as a kind of spice, "green pepper" is both a common name and a proprietary species name, and should not be registered by private rights and become an exclusive and monopolistic brand asset.

The point of contention is that it has been argued that "green pepper" is only considered a generic name on "condiments", but not a generic name for "food service", so it can be registered as a trademark of food service. For example, Apple and Xiaomi can become trademarks of mobile phone companies. This is also the reason for the successful registration of a catering enterprise in Shanghai.

I have to say that this reason is very far-fetched, or it is a loophole in the management of trademark registration. After all, green peppercorns are highly correlated with catering services, which means that the generic name of the raw material becomes a trademark of the company. Apple and Xiaomi are not raw materials for mobile phone products, but only imaginary connections.

As for the litigation and protection of rights of the catering enterprise, it is also considered to be "inexplicable" and "incomprehensible" brand behavior. It is nominally to maintain the brand of the enterprise, but in fact it is an act of abusing rights, wasting judicial resources, and pursuing improper interests.

As a brand act of malicious litigation, many people compare the "green pepper" incident with the recent Incident of Hu Spicy Soup and Tongguan Meat Sandwich Steamed Bun in Xiaoyao Town.

Local brand awareness is awakening

In the last two rights protection incidents, the authoritative response of the State Intellectual Property Office could not collect membership and franchise fees was finalized. The so-called rights protection lawsuits have also come to an abrupt end. This is similar to the "green pepper" incident. However, there are also differences, even fundamental differences, between the two.

First of all, the subjects of rights protection are different. Whether it is the peppery soup in Xiaoyao Town or the Meat Sandwich Bun in Tongguan, it is the local industry association that defends the rights, under the banner of maintaining local brands and local industries. Of course, industry associations delegate trademarks to private companies to operate and manage, or entrust third-party companies and law firms to carry out so-called trademark protection.

In the "Green Pepper" incident, a private enterprise registered a trademark for the common name of a local specialty, appropriated it for its own use, and then entrusted a third-party law firm to carry out the so-called rights protection.

According to the client, its original intention was to crack down on bad businesses that maliciously imitated and cheated franchise fees, and protected their brands, and as a result, the law firm distorted the original intention. Therefore, the client has zero cost throughout the process and does not take a penny from the litigation proceeds. But this provides an opportunity and motivation for the law firm's malicious litigation. There is no free lunch under the sky, and the law firm has no profit to start early, since the income from rights protection can be fully pocketed, it must also sharpen its head to find the target, seize the opportunity to sue.

In terms of interest mechanism, both of the front and back benefit a hole, both in the name of maintaining the brand to make a profit. However, the Incident of Peppery Soup and Tongguan Meat Sandwich Steamed Bun in Xiaoyao Town is an expanded crackdown on local brands that stand on the standpoint of local interests and belong to the local brands that have crossed the line; while the "Green Pepper" incident is to stand in the position of the interests of private enterprises, turn local brands into private, and attempt to launch an attack on local brands with public value attributes.

This is another fundamental difference between the two. That is, the Incident of Hu Spicy Soup and Tongguan Meat Sandwich Steamed Bun in Xiaoyao Town, after the response of the authoritative department, the local brand consciously recycled the front, which can be temporarily ended. After the "Green Pepper" incident withdrew the lawsuit, the defense war of local brands has just begun.

This battle to defend local brands should be started and must be launched. Because the "green pepper" incident is not an isolated case in the market economy, this problem cannot be solved, and there will be "red pepper" and "red sea pepper" incidents in the future.

As a local specialty of Sichuan-Chongqing region and an important condiment of Sichuan cuisine, green peppercorns can be considered as a brand asset in Sichuan and even Sichuan-Chongqing region in a sense. If such a brand equity can become a trademark of a private enterprise and be monopolized, it is obviously harmful to local brands and even local industries.

In this regard, defending green peppercorns is defending local brands with public value. Only from such a perspective can we correctly understand the green pepper incident and better promote the progress of the event.

What is gratifying is that the current green pepper incident is advancing along the thinking and logic of local brands. The relevant associations in the Sichuan-Chongqing region have joined forces to propose invalidation proceedings against the "Green Pepper" trademark, and this does not preclude all necessary measures to resolve the legal issues involved in the "Green Pepper Incident".

This can be seen as an awakening of local brand awareness. Everyone gradually realizes the value of the brand, the market economy has entered the brand era, and urban development is also entering the brand era, but there is still a process of exploration and clarification of the rights and boundaries of various brand assets. The green peppercorn incident provides such a sample that deserves further observation and anticipation.

Daily economic news