“Rules on Prohibitive and Restrictive Use of Enterprise Names” and “Rules for Identity and Similarity Comparison for Enterprise Names” promulgated by SAIC have come into force on July 31, 2017

With the rapid development of enterprises, the unfair-competition behaviors related to the enterprise’s name became more and more. In view of this, SAIC released the “Rules on Prohibitive and Restrictive Use of Enterprise Names” and “Rules for Identity and Similarity Comparison for Enterprise Names” (Gong Shang Qi Zhu Zi (2017) No.133) (hereinafter, “No. 133”). To compare with “Administrative Provisions on Enterprise Name Registration” (2012 Amendment) and “Measures for Implementing the Administration of Enterprise Name Registration” (2004 promulgated) (hereinafter, the “Original Rules”), the highlights of “No.133” are as follows:

1.Prohibitive Rules

(1) Forbidding the same name: An enterprise’s name shall not be identical to the name of another enterprise in the same industry which has been registered with or ratified by the same registration organ. “No.133” canceled the exception clause on investment relations. To attach “not being deregistered” to “the name of an enterprise in the same industry of which the establishment registration is cancelled and business license is revoked”, “No.133” canceled the “3 years” requirment in the “Original Rules”. Those 2 amendments could guarantee the uniqueness of the newly registered enterprise’s name which is registered in the specific registration organ.

(2) Forbidding using foreign language: No.133 stipulates that an enterprise name shall not use any foreign language.

2.Restrictive Rules

(1) The name of an enterprise could be similar to the name of an enterprise which has investment relationship.

The “Original Rules” applied a case-by-case approval principle on the name which could be similar to the name of an enterprise in the same industry that has been registered with or ratified by the same registration organ, but “No.133” rectifies it as a single objective criterion, namely investment relationship only.

(2) Regarding “including other enterprise’s name”

According to the “Original Rules”, only the enterprise’s branch could include the name of this enterprise. However, “No.133” stipulates that the name of the enterprise may include other enterprise’s name, when they have an investment relationship or the enterprise has obtained the authorization of the other enterprise, in addition, it could only use the other enterprise’s abbreviation or specific title. In order to constrain the expansion of an enterprise’s name, “No.133” also provides that if the other enterprise’s abbreviation or specific title has other meanings or points to uncertainty, the enterprise could use such abbreviation or specific title without authorization.

(3) Forbidding using the well-known trademark as an enterprise’s name without authorization

“No.133” stipulates that nobody could use the characters in a well-known trademark as the enterprise’s name without authorization.

3.Comparison Rules

“No.133” stipulates rules on the identification of the identical or similarity among enterprises’ names in the name comparison system, and demonstrates some typical situations as examples. For example, different in sequence of, but identical in words to, the administrative division, trade name, industry and organizational form of an enterprise name already registered with or ratified by the same registration organ, such as Beijing Hongguang Wine Industry Co., Ltd. and Hongguang (Beijing) Wine Industry Co., Ltd. Enterprises could adopt these examples to review its own name before the name pre-registration.