During the 2026 China Fair Competition Policy Publicity Week, the Supreme People’s Court selected and released 9 typical cases focusing on important legal issues such as the determination of passing off and confusion, infringement of technical secrets, commercial disparagement, false advertising, online unfair competition acts, and the application of the general clauses of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. The content covers both traditional consumer fields and emerging and key fields such as artificial intelligence, new energy, and the platform economy.
Case1 Registering and using a trade name similar to another’s registered trademark to mislead the public constitutes unfair competition
Case2 Remuneration obtained from undertaking engineering projects by using another’s technical secrets may be regarded as infringement profits
Case3 Malicious “transcoding and reconstruction” constitutes unfair competition that obstructs or disrupts the normal operation of another's network products
Case4 The title of a well-known film or television drama with distinctiveness constitutes a “commercial sign with a certain influence”
Case5 Providing a “physical plug-in” for order grabbing that disrupts platform competition order constitutes unfair competition
Case6 Using AI to fabricate review articles about another’s products for free-riding traffic constitutes unfair competition
Case7 Tampering with a peer’s livestream e-commerce video to mislead the public constitutes false advertising
Case8 Maliciously editing another’s product review video to disparage a competitor constitutes commercial disparagement
Case9 A false comparative advertisement capable of identifying and comparing the source of goods constitutes commercial disparagement
(September 9, 2026 News Bureau of the Supreme People’s Court)
Case1 Registering and using a trade name similar to another’s registered trademark to mislead the public constitutes unfair competition
Case2 Remuneration obtained from undertaking engineering projects by using another’s technical secrets may be regarded as infringement profits
Case3 Malicious “transcoding and reconstruction” constitutes unfair competition that obstructs or disrupts the normal operation of another's network products
Case4 The title of a well-known film or television drama with distinctiveness constitutes a “commercial sign with a certain influence”
Case5 Providing a “physical plug-in” for order grabbing that disrupts platform competition order constitutes unfair competition
Case6 Using AI to fabricate review articles about another’s products for free-riding traffic constitutes unfair competition
Case7 Tampering with a peer’s livestream e-commerce video to mislead the public constitutes false advertising
Case8 Maliciously editing another’s product review video to disparage a competitor constitutes commercial disparagement
Case9 A false comparative advertisement capable of identifying and comparing the source of goods constitutes commercial disparagement
(September 9, 2026 News Bureau of the Supreme People’s Court)