Team Lawyers' Representation in Anhui Yaohai vs. Hefei Yaohai Case Tops Local Trending on Weibo and Gains Coverage from Anhui Daily and Anhui Business News!

On Friday, December 26, 2025, the Weibo topic #AnhuiYaohaiSuesHefeiYaohai topped the trending list in Hefei. As of now, views have rapidly exceeded 500,000.

Furthermore, Anhui Business News published an article titled "'Yaohai Furniture' Sues Competitor for Riding on the Coattails of 'Yaohai'", and the Anhui Daily APP released "[Zhang Jian's Legal Perspective] 'Yaohai Furniture' Sues to Prohibit Yaohai So-and-So Furniture from Using 'Yaohai'—Supported by Hefei Intermediate Court and Anhui High Court". Multiple media outlets have reported on this case, generating widespread attention.

In this case, Anhui Yaohai Furniture Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (referred to as "Yaohai Furniture Company"), whose business scope includes furniture manufacturing, R&D, and decorative materials sales, legally obtained the graphic trademark "Yaohai" and the word trademark "Yaohai," approved for use in Class 20 goods. The company sued Yaohai So-and-So Furniture Company, demanding that the latter cease using the characters "瑶海" (Yaohai) as its trade name for promotional purposes.

The Hefei Intermediate Court held that Yaohai So-and-So Furniture Company constituted unfair competition. Accordingly, the court ruled that Yaohai So-and-So Furniture Company immediately stop using a trade name containing the characters "瑶海" (Yaohai) and compensate Yaohai Furniture Company for economic losses. Dissatisfied with the first-instance judgment, Yaohai So-and-So Furniture Company appealed. Recently, the Anhui High Court issued a final judgment, dismissing the appeal and upholding the original ruling.

This case was represented by lawyers Du Yuancheng and Jin Huikang from the Rayto Zhiwen Team, with lawyers Wang Zeyang and Gu Xueqiao also participating in the handling.

Lawyer Du Yuancheng stated that the defendant, as a market competitor in the same region and industry, was clearly aware that the plaintiff enjoyed exclusive rights to the "Yaohai" series of trademarks and trade name rights. Not only did the defendant fail to reasonably avoid conflict, but it also took a series of actions to improperly use "Yaohai" as its trade name. "The defendant's use was not based on a legitimate need to objectively describe a geographical location or indicate product attributes. Although 'Yaohai District' is an administrative division name, and the enterprise name had been approved and registered by the market supervision department, such approval is merely a formal review and cannot serve as a valid defense for the legitimacy of its use. It has exceeded the scope of good faith and reasonable use permitted by law."

In the future, Rayto will continue to deepen its expertise in the intellectual property field and consistently provide high-quality intellectual property legal services.