"Triple" trademark ownership case

This report on the "triple" trademark ownership rights issue again. May 16, *st Triple (600898) issued "on the trademark litigation case Bulletin," said: "779479" "triple" trademark contract dispute against the case of Shandong Sanlian Group, has been accepted on May 14 by the Jinan Intermediate People's Court, and on July 17 trial.　　*st Triple v. asked the Court to decree the Triple group immediately stop the registration number "779479" "triple" trademark transfer to any third party behavior, and the trade mark for free transfer to *st triple. In this regard, the triple Group, the Triple group and *st between the triple and the right to use the contract agreement is clear and clear. According to the Triple group, the contract for the use of trademark license signed by Licensor (Triple Group) and licensee (Zhengzhou Bai Wen Corporation (group)) under the contract of January 27, 2003 is valid on the premise that "Licensor is" Triple ' The trademark of the Service trademark, Licensor is the licensee's first major shareholder, actively support the development of the licensee.　　"All of the 1-16 items stipulated in the contract are subject to this precondition, and in the seventh" trademark identification and use "expressly stipulates: Licensee acknowledges that Licensor is the sole legal owner of the triple mark. *st Triple said that if the "triple" Service trademark ownership disputes and the right to use disputes can not be properly resolved, the company's business continuity and the integrity of the company's assets will be seriously affected, the operation is facing significant risks. Triple Group has another explanation, since February 14, 2008, *st triple 27 million shares of limited sales conditions of the circulation of shares were malicious acquisition, the Triple group has lost the status of large shareholders. Therefore, the terms of entry into force of the contract ceased to exist.　　Therefore, the "scope, duration, and not competition" of the trademark Use Agreement lose the legal effect at the same time. Triple Group has always believed that the Gome bid for *st Triple is a malicious takeover, the actual control of the legality of the triple *st is still in the litigation process, the legitimacy of the equity auction has yet to be a judicial decision on the ownership of listed companies have not settled the dust, so the triple group temporarily did not require its use of　　Triple Group believes that, in fact, the current *ST triple continue to use the "triple" service trademark has been infringed. Sanlian Group said that the *st of the triple announcement to avoid the "trademark license to use the key provisions of the contract, deliberately misinterpreted the meaning of the text, the Triple group will retain its right to be held responsible."