China's highest court on Tuesday "tried the trademark case lodged by U.S. basketball legend Michael Jordan against a Chinese sportswear firm," according to XINHUA. Tuesday's trial "featured the court investigation, debates and final statements." A verdict "has not yet been made." Jordan, who retired from the sport in '03, said that "he welcomed the decision" of the Supreme People's Court to hear his cases after years of lawsuit. Jordan said, "I'm pleased that the Supreme People's Court in China decided to hear my cases against Qiaodan Sports on World Intellectual Property Day. These cases are very important to me -- they are about bringing an end to Qiaodan Sports' misuse of my name, identity and likeness, which continues to confuse Chinese consumers. I believe my Chinese fans and all Chinese consumers deserve to know what they are buying, and that Qiaodan Sports and its products have no connection to me. I respect the Chinese legal system, and I look forward to the court's ruling" (XINHUA, 4/26). In Shanghai, Li Qian reported Jordan's lawyers said that Qiaodan Sports had "built its business around the Chinese version of Jordan’s name and a silhouette of a basketball player similar to the 'Jumpman' logo promoting his Nike-produced Air Jordan brand." The firm said that Jordan did not "own the Qiaodan name." It said that it was only "the firm’s success that had caused Jordan to become aware of its market value." The Trademark Appraisal Committee under the State Administration for Industry and Commerce told the court that Qiaodan Sports had registered its trademarks in '00, "more than 12 years before Jordan filed his first lawsuit" (SHANGHAI DAILY, 4/27). BLOOMBERG reported the court could rule within days on Jordan's "closely watched trademark suit." The case "illustrates the challenges of Chinese intellectual property law for some foreign companies in the world’s fastest-growing consumer market." The case could "set an important legal precedent for trademark rights in China, and some legal scholars say the case offers the nation’s Supreme People’s Court an opportunity to present a positive image of the Chinese legal system." Chinese Academy of Social Sciences research specialist Li Shunde said, "It’s an extremely influential case, and the final verdict from China’s top court would play a leading role in future similar cases." Li predicted that the top court will overturn the previous verdict that has caused "huge debate." The top court "typically issues its rulings within days of hearing cases." However, court proceedings in China "remain secretive, and the exact timing is uncertain" (BLOOMBERG, 4/26).
