advertising and also registered the mark in Macao and Hongkong.It is due to its investment and unique model of marketing.brand development,Shangha ai Foxtown become a famou outlet operator in China.The consumer in China actually would not link it to a foreign outlet business operator.Besides,before 2003,few Chinese went to Swissland for tourism and few people in China knew Swiss Foxtown,therefore the argument for a world well-known trademark of Swiss"Foxtown"is not convincing. The case was later brought to Shanghai 1st Middle Court for decision.Please answer the following questions: 1).Considering the above fact,do you think Chinese Trademark Office in Shanghai shall prohibited the use of the trademark or cancel the registration of "Foxtown"by Shanghai company and assigned it to the later coming competitor from Swissland who claimed they should have the k based on Pari ion Art.6 II and Chinese Trad ark Law rele 1c in repet of ich thepo for 13f on of w registration is filed for use for identical or similar goods is a reproduction,imitation or translation of a well-known trademark of others which hasn't registered in China and is likely to cause confusion,it shall be rejected for registration and prohibited from use. of whic n fo a ue app registration is filed for use for non-identical or dissimilar goods is a reproduction.imitation or translation of the well-known mark of another person tha has been registered in China,misleads the pub 1ic and is likely to create prejudice to the interests of the well-known mark registrant.it shall be rejected for registration and prohibited from use. 2).Do you think Shanghai Foxtown conducted unfair competition according to Chinese Unfair Competition Law 2.On Mar.18,2008,shanghai No.I Intermediate Court accepted a case brought by TTTCo. Ltd (hereafter TTT)against Lili for trade secret infringement. The plaintiff TIT alleged that the defendant Lili was senior executive of TIT and according to er ployment agre ent,had non-compete and confidentiality obligations to TTT.But permission and redirected clients from TIT to TiTiTi by making use of the trade secrets he acquired during his employment at TTT,which constitute trade secret infringement.The alleged trade secret,according to plaintiff,is the information about TTT's client,specification, quantity.sales price of its product KA74.Therefore,TTT demanded compensation of RMB 1advertising and also registered the mark in Macao and Hongkong. It is due to its investment and unique model of marketing, brand development, Shanghai Foxtown become a famous outlet operator in China. The consumer in China actually would not link it to a foreign outlet business operator. Besides, before 2003, few Chinese went to Swissland for tourism and few people in China knew Swiss Foxtown, therefore the argument for a world well-known trademark of Swiss “Foxtown” is not convincing. The case was later brought to Shanghai 1st Middle Court for decision. Please answer the following questions: 1）. Considering the above fact, do you think Chinese Trademark Office in Shanghai shall prohibited the use of the trademark or cancel the registration of “Foxtown” by Shanghai company and assigned it to the later coming competitor from Swissland who claimed they should have the trademark based on Paris Convention Art. 6 II and Chinese Trademark Law Art. 13 for the protection of well-known trademark? Article 13 （Chinese Trademark Law） Where a trademark in respect of which the application for registration is filed for use for identical or similar goods is a reproduction, imitation or translation of a well-known trademark of others which hasn’t registered in China and is likely to cause confusion, it shall be rejected for registration and prohibited from use. Where a trademark in respect of which the application for registration is filed for use for non-identical or dissimilar goods is a reproduction, imitation or translation of the well-known mark of another person that has been registered in China, misleads the pub1ic and is likely to create prejudice to the interests of the well-known mark registrant, it shall be rejected for registration and prohibited from use. 2）. Do you think Shanghai Foxtown conducted unfair competition according to Chinese Unfair Competition Law? 2. On Mar. 18, 2008, shanghai No.1 Intermediate Court accepted a case brought by TTT Co. Ltd (hereafter TTT) against Lili for trade secret infringement. The plaintiff TTT alleged that the defendant Lili was senior executive of TTT and according to employment agreement, had non-compete and confidentiality obligations to TTT. But defendant set up the TiTiTi Co.Ltd (hereafter TiTiTi) during his employment without permission and redirected clients from TTT to TiTiTi by making use of the trade secrets he acquired during his employment at TTT, which constitute trade secret infringement. The alleged trade secret, according to plaintiff, is the information about TTT’s client, specification, quantity, sales price of its product KA74. Therefore, TTT demanded compensation of RMB 1 million