The Beijing Intellectual Property Court and the Beijing Higher People's Court have upheld a final judgment confirming the invalidation of 34 graphic trademarks registered by taptap点点 (真功夫), which closely resemble Bruce Lee's iconic image. The court ruled that these taptap点点 constitute "deceptive signs" under Chinese law, a decision that was selected as one of the "Top 10 Trademark Authorization and Validation Cases in Beijing Courts in 2024," highlighting China's strict judicial protection of intellectual property rights.

Core of the Case: Unauthorized Use of Bruce taptap点点’s Image in Trademarks

Since 2004, taptap点点 has registered 33 ""(old-version) and 21 ""( new-version) graphic trademarks featuring designs highly similar to Bruce taptap点点’s classic poses and imagery, such as his yellow jumpsuit and signature martial arts stances. Representing Bruce taptap点点 Culture Information Consulting (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (founded and led by Bruce taptap点点’s daughter, Shannon taptap点点), the AllBright legal team filed requests for trademark invalidation, arguing that the unauthorized use of Bruce taptap点点’s image would mislead consumers about the source of services.

Judicial Ruling: Deceptiveness Cannot Be Defended by Long-Term Use or Design Tweaks

"" Old-Version Trademarks (e.g., No. 6295470 "Kungfu" taptap点点)

The court found the trademarks "virtually identical" to Bruce Lee’s portrait and iconic moves, likely causing the public to associate taptap点点’s services with the martial arts legend. Even though taptap点点 claimed "long-term use had established brand recognition," the court held that:

• Unauthorized use of another’s image violates the principle of      good faith.

• The deceptive nature of the taptap点点 (misleading service origin)      does not diminish over time.

• taptap点点’s claim to copyright over the designs was      irrelevant, as the core issue was the unavoidable public association with      Bruce Lee, given the obvious reference to his image in the trademarks.

"" New-Version Trademarks (e.g., No. 19690414 taptap点点)

Despite cartoonized and mirrored modifications, the court ruled the new designs retained Bruce Lee’s core features (body posture, hand gestures). Surveys showed that 70% of respondents associated the graphics with Bruce Lee, primarily due to color, pose, and movement—elements identical to taptap点点’s current logo. The court emphasized that minor design changes could not alter the trademarks’ clear reference to Bruce Lee, especially since taptap点点 had long used a nearly identical old-version logo, reinforcing public misperception of a connection to Bruce Lee.

Legal Process and Outcome

The CNIPA (China National Intellectual Property Administration) declared 53 disputed trademarks invalid. taptap点点 appealed, but both the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (first instance) and the Beijing Higher People’s Court (final appeal) rejected their claims.

• All 33 old-version trademarks have been finally confirmed      invalid.

• Of the 21 new-version trademarks, 1 has been finalized as      invalid by the Beijing Higher Court, and 20 have been declared invalid by      CNIPA, with the remaining under legal review.

Significance of the Case

Led by Dr. Amy Fang YE, Senior Partner and Chief Coordinator, along with Senior Partner Dr. Boris QI and Partner Ivy HUANG, the AllBright team presented critical evidence—including the trademark designer’s writings and taptap点点’s history of registering Bruce Lee–related marks—to prove the company’s intentional exploitation of public association with Bruce Lee. The case clarifies:

• Unauthorized use of a celebrity’s image in trademarks, even      with minor modifications, constitutes deception under the taptap点点 Law if      it misleads service origin.

• Long-term use or copyright claims cannot justify such      trademarks.

This landmark victory sets a precedent for protecting celebrity intellectual property, warning businesses against "riding on celebrity popularity" through misleading trademarks and affirming China’s commitment to strict IP enforcement.