Chinese Branding And Trademarking: I Say Blackberry, You Say Redberry

C2C(copy to china) business model is still popular in china when you look into internet industry like web2.0. so the story in your article actually reflects the root cause---innovation. most of chinese companies startuped from mimic and copy, but now i think they are changing because i noticed their TV ad. became more creative and interesting:)

Lining: Anything is Possible.
Adidas: Impossible is Nothing.

Lirelou --

Thanks for checking in and for reminding me of the cheese I enjoyed as a kid living in France and of the beer I drank when I studied there.

My sense is that the Chinese are hugely brand conscious.

Chris Waugh --

Thanks for checking in. You raise some good points re Baidupedia and Baidu Space.

But when China United Telecommunications Corp. launched its Redberry wireless email service it announced at its press conference that the name would "extend the image and name of 'BlackBerry' that people are already familiar with."

The Rowe name was given to the car after Shanghai Automotive lost out on buying the Rover name. Chery is one letter off from Chevy and it is difficult to see that as a coincidence.

The article was focusing on these names as copies; it did not opine as to whether they violated any trademarks.

I agree with Chris that you have to look at how the names sound in Chinese before deciding whether someone is trying to copy an established brand name. Qirui (Chery) and Xuefulai (Chevrolet/Chevy) are so different in Chinese that no one will ever even remotely connect the two. Like Chris pointed out, Qirui was an established brand in China long before GM brought Chevrolet to China. I'm guessing that Qirui chose Chery as the English version of their name because it sounds very similar to how Qirui is pronounced in Chinese.

Thanks for the clarification of the Rowe/Rover Redberry/Blackberry cases. However, you seem to have completely missed the point of my comment. Well, Hui Mao explains it all far more clearly than I did.

"The article was focusing on these names as copies; it did not opine as to whether they violated any trademarks."

Well, that clarifies the article, but..... It would seem to me that the difference between copying and violating trademark (or other forms of IPR) is somewhat similar to the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion: At some point the government has drawn a line between perhaps dodgy, but legal behaviour and downright badness. Whatever, this still makes the inclusion of Qirui/Chery, Wumei/Wumart and Baidu's various products/services on a list that includes both pushing-the-limit dodginess and obvious badness misleading.

As I pointed out, and Hui Mao confirms, Qirui/Chery was a confirmed and established brand here long before GM started marketing Xuefulai/Chevrolet. Not only that, but the dispute alluded to had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with branding (be it perfectly legal imitation or straight out theft of a trademark) and everything to do with the design of two particular models of car (so far as I remember). Including this in a list including the Shanghai Xingbake vs. Starbucks and other examples of trademark dodginess and outright theft is not a matter of legal distinctions, it's a matter of journalistic dishonesty.

As I tried to point out, and as Hui Mao confirmed, the issue here is one of language and not of any kind of imitation of a brand. Qirui's anglicisation Chery fits well within an established Chinese 'culture' of anglicisation. Some choose the historic approach: Beijing Daxue/Peking University; Qinghua Daxue/Tsinghua University/ Qingdao Pijiu/Tsingtao Beer. Some piggy back on or falsify the historic approach: Qinghua Tongfang/Tsinghua Tongfang, along with others that use some bastardisation or another of Wade-Giles. Some, like all the banks, go for translation: Zhongguo Yinhang/Bank of China. Some just use Hanyu Pinyin: Haier. Some just find an English name they like that roughly approximates the sound of their Chinese name: Fangzheng/Founder, or Lianxiang, which was first Legend and then Lenovo (and now, in China at least, seems to alternate between IBM and Lenovo, depending on how much they want to charge for what seem to be identical products) Some, like Qirui/Chery, go for a rough romanisation: Jili/Geely or Wumei/Wumart.

In short, if I were the editor of the WSJ, based on what you posted, I would have fired the journalist in question. How could somebody who seems to have not even the most basic understanding of the Chinese language or the Chinese economy possibly be an asset to one of the world's most famous and respected business papers?

Oh, and Hui Mao, I agree with you on why Qirui seems to have chosen Chery. But take another look: The majority of English speakers, and speakers of European languages in general, will have a much better chance of pronouncing the brand name correctly (or close enough) if they read 'Chery' than if they read 'Qirui'. Which, at least to my mind, reinforces the point that several of the cases cited by the original article have more to do with language, culture and marketplace than any kind of imitation of brands (legal or otherwise).

Sorry for the unnecessary comment. To sum up: This article, as blogged, seems to have less to do with imitation of brands and much more to do with either lazy or dishonest journalism.

chriswaugh --

Thanks for checking in.

Though I am usually the first to bash the media for its loose reporting on China (see and though I am always complaining about how the media will say someone stole someone else's name without even knowing to check to see who actually had the trademark in China, this article was just fine. The theme of the article was that Chinese companies find it easier to copy already existing names than to create their own. The article never once mentioned the word trademark. I do not think it can be disputed that Chinese companies often copy simply because they view that as the safe thing to do. We have spoken with Chinese company owners that say the same thing. Indeed, there is this tendency (though usually on a lesser scale) all around the world. There is a tendency everywhere to copy what has worked. Look at American TV shows. Look at American fashion.

If there was confusion, I take the blame for it because I brought up the word "trademark" in my conclusion as to how companies can fight against cognates. If you are Chevy and you do not want someone using the name Chery on a car, trademark the name Chery. Sure, Chery sounds like Qirui, but so does Cherry and they did not choose that.

Read the full article (if you have not already) and then tell me if you think it so bad.

Speaking of copying, check out this article on BBC, that seems to somewhat track the WSJ article, but without any attribution:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6067000.stm

Chriswaugh --

Thanks for checking back in. I think it is all my fault. The list was simply of cognates -- names that sound similar. Here is what the article itself says about Chery:

"As it happens, Chery says, its Chery's English name is based on the sound of its Chinese name, Qirui, pronounced che-ray, which means, roughly, "unusually lucky." It sounds nothing like the Chinese name for Chevrolet, Xuefolan, and Chery continues to be the corporate name and the brand in China. But Visionary Vehicles LLC, a U.S. company aiming to bring Chery-built cars to the U.S. says that it won't use the Chery brand name there."

And here is what the article has to say about Wumart:

"Does Wumart Stores have a familiar ring? It could be confused with Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Wumart says its English name is based on its Chinese name, Wu Mei, which means "beautiful products." Nikita Huang, a Wal-Mart spokeswoman in China, says her company 'doesn't have much concern. We believe consumers know the difference.'"

Clyde --

That's a cool logo and Wumart should copy it. Of course, if Wu-Tang has not trademarked it in China, WuMart (or anyone else) could appropriate it legally.