According to the Trademark Law and the Guidelines for Trademark Examination and Trial, similar trademarks on similar goods are generally not allowed to coexist. Specifically, when two trademarks are similar in terms of wording, graphics, or pronunciation, and are used on the same or similar goods, they are likely to cause consumer confusion. For example, when a consumer sees the name “Nongfu Orchard,” they may easily associate it with “Nongfu Spring.” Similarly, “Golden Carp” cooking oil could easily be mistaken for “Golden Dragon Fish” cooking oil, leading consumers to believe that these are product lines from the same provider. In these particular examples, both sets of trademarks do indeed come from the same company.

However, when similar trademarks are used on similar goods by different providers, and consumers only exercise ordinary attention, confusion is highly likely. Therefore, in principle, such similar trademarks are not allowed to coexist.

Yet in practice, exceptions do exist. For instance, if two trademarks have established their own consumer bases and market recognition, and consumers are able to clearly distinguish between their sources, they may be permitted to coexist. In reality, it’s not uncommon to see similar trademarks from different entities coexisting on similar goods—even among well-known brands. This phenomenon has sparked legal debate and drawn widespread attention from consumers.

For example, the walnut protein beverages “Six Walnuts” and “Woyuan Six Kernel Walnuts” coexist in the market. Although the latter went through an opposition procedure, the trademark office still approved the registration of “Woyuan Six Kernel Walnuts.” While the names “Six Walnuts” and “Six Kernel Walnuts” are similar, the former is a well-known brand with high market recognition and customer loyalty. Consumers have a clear understanding of its brand image, product quality, and origin, and can easily distinguish it from other similar brands. Furthermore, the “Woyuan” part in “Woyuan Six Kernel Walnuts” is also distinctive and helps consumers identify the product’s source.

There are real-world reasons why similar trademarks from different market entities can coexist on similar goods or services:

1.Consumer Awareness and Market Reality
In many cases, even when trademark names and designs are similar, consumers can still differentiate them due to the strong brand recognition of well-known brands. The higher the brand awareness, the more familiar consumers are, and thus the better they can distinguish between sources of goods or services.

2.Market Positioning and Price Differences
The two brands may differ in market positioning and pricing, targeting different consumer groups. For example, Japanese domestic car brands may be priced under 100,000 RMB, while Toyota’s vehicles often range from 200,000 to 500,000 RMB. As a result, the market segments are clearly different, and there's minimal overlap between the two consumer groups.

3.Trademark Coexistence Agreements Before 2021
Before 2021, the Trademark Office and courts held a relatively lenient attitude toward trademark coexistence agreements, which led to many similar trademarks being allowed to coexist. This reflects the authorities’ recognition of private market players’ willingness to share exclusive trademark rights. However, since 2021, the Trademark Office has tightened its stance on accepting such agreements, meaning that theoretically, coexistence approvals have become less common in recent years.

Frequent trademark searches reveal that trademark coexistence is not rare in practice. This phenomenon reflects not only the diversity and complexity of the market, but also poses regulatory challenges for legal oversight of trademark use by market players. Moving forward, how to strike a balance between protecting consumer interests and maintaining market competition will be a key issue for both legal and regulatory authorities. Only by finding equilibrium among law, market forces, and consumer perception can the true value of trademark protection be achieved.