Recently, the Beijing intellectual property court accepted the ‘JD.com v. National Intellectual Property Administration, the third person Alibaba group holdings Co., Ltd. for a "Double Eleventh Day" the trademark rights of trademark review of administrative disputes.

On November 1, 2011, Alibaba applied to register the trademark "Double 11" on services such as category 35 advertising.

JD.com believes that from November 13, 2015, to November 12, 2018, Alibaba did not make actual and effective commercial use of the trademark involved in the "Double Eleven Day" case, so it filed a revoke application to the CNIPA for have not been used for three consecutive years. CNIPA examined and considered that the evidence provided by Alibaba is sufficient to prove the actual and effective use of the "Double Eleventh Day" trademark and decided to maintain it.

JD.com is not satisfied with the decision and filed a review to CNIPA. Through the review, CNIPA considers that according to the evidence provided by Alibaba, during this period the activities of Alibaba by setting the activity rules, the official Weibo promotion, and other media report regarding the Double Eleventh Day related party and turnover, etc., the "Double Eleventh Day" trademark was used, and it makes the relevant public may know Alibaba by way of the promotional activities. Through its cooperation with the related brands and the promotions, customer may be willing to buy goods. Therefore, the trademark of "Double Eleventh Day" in the lawsuit has played a role in advertising and product promotion for the brand partner. Therefore, it can be determined that the trademark of Alibaba's "Double Eleventh Day" shall be "advertising" within the specified period. Display merchandise on the communications media for retail purposes; The registration of the aforesaid Services shall be maintained for the genuine commercial use of the "services for sale to others". 

As for other services approved by the trademark in dispute, the evidence submitted by Alibaba does not reflect that the trademark in dispute is "business management assistance; Business information; Providing business information and advice to consumers (Consumer Advice Agency); To organize trade or advertising fairs; Computer database information classification; Accounting; The registration of the trademark in question on the said service shall be revoked.

JD.com is not satisfied with the decision and has filed a lawsuit with the Beijing Intellectual Property Court within the legal time limit, and the case is under further trial.