Several days after the arbitration, Guangzhou Pharmaceutical started to produce their own red can Wanglaoji beverage. [7]

These companies have relatively strong market share and competitiveness, and the domestic herbal tea beverage market needs to continue to develop.

False advertising

If you are worried about yourself People’s diet or living habits can cause one to get angry, so you can drink this product, which just hits people’s desire for fire fighting for fear of getting angry. The prior use should be on commodities identical to or similar to those designated by the registered trademark.

This not only required a large capital investment, but also required time and relationship maintenance, which was also an important factor affecting Wanglaoji. After losing the brand trademark, Jiaduobao completed the brand conversion from Wanglaoji to Jiaduobao.Wong Lo Kat ( Chinese: 王老吉), or Wanglaoji in Mandarin pinyin, is a Chinese herbal tea, and one of the most popular tisane drinks in China today. It is sold in many forms and different types of cans or cardboard containers.

Given that trademark ownership remains with the licensor at the end of a licence agreement, it is highly recommended to stipulate in the agreement whether the licensor and/or the licensee shall bear the cost of advertisements and promotion and which party will benefit from such promotion. This will prevent the licensee from requesting compensation and claiming that the trademark has gained value as a result of its own effort. It has been used traditionally as an herbal remedy to treat diarrhea, high blood pressure, fevers, weaknesses of heart and liver and internal bleeding. Wang Lao Ji, the licensor, was not too happy with this decision, in particular when the licensee, Jia Duo Bao, launched an advertisement campaign, after the termination of the trademark licence agreement, using the following slogan: "The national leading red canned herbal tea changed its name to Jia Duo Bao", which obviously gave the impression that its product was the original product which had changed its name. The licensor Wang Lao Ji initiated another lawsuit on the ground of false advertisement. In the second half of the year, the battle between Nongfu and Yibao seemed to lead nowhere. But following the battle, a piece of news reported that Nongfu Spring was going to sue the Beijing Times for their false reports, claiming for 200 million yuan (USD 32.8 million) compensation. N0.4 China Mobile VS China Unicom VS China TelecomFurther, it is possible to stipulate that another sign belonging to the licensee may be used together with the licensed trademark. In such cases, at the end of the licence agreement, the licensee may continue to use its own trademark, which has benefited from the promotion during the life of the agreement. This may arise in situations where the licensee has a stronger position in the negotiations with the trademark owner. In the Wang Lao Ji case, the SPC stated that the goodwill attached to the trademark, which may have considerably increased through the implementation of the licence agreement, could not be separated from the ownership of the trademark. However, the Court also ruled that since the container developed by the licensee had become a source identifier, both the licensor and the licensee should be allowed to use it.

Take small, deliberate sips to truly savour the flavours of the herbal tea. Allow each sip to linger on your palate, noticing the herbal nuances that make this beverage unique. Embracing the herbal goodness of the drink as part of your wellness routine. Wong Lo Kat is the Cantonese version of the drink's name, which is Wanglaoji in Mandarin. Dr. Wong Chat Bong invented it in 1828 in Guangdong province. The recipe afterwards passed down generation to generation. In the fast-moving consumer goods industry, there are many domestic and foreign beverage brands, and beverage branding is becoming more and more concentrated, gradually squeezing the living space of small beverage brands.

According to the SPC, if a party, based on the previous trademark licensing contract it entered into with another party and its contribution in promoting the goodwill of the licensed trademark, by releasing the commercial taglines, informs the consumers of the fundamental facts without creating misunderstanding among the relevant public and exhibiting no intention to improperly exploit the reputation and goodwill of the said trademark, this shall not be considered to be false advertising (which is prescribed in the Anti-Unfair Competition Law). In 2019, the SPC, in the retrial judgment, reversed the Guangdong High Court decision and rejected Wang Lao Ji's above claims.