This violates the provisions of Article 31 of the Trademark Law." Jordan also claimed for portrait right against Qiaodan Sports' logo. However, prosecutors claimed that "the Qiaodan's logo did not violate Jordan's portraiture rights as it does not include distinguishable facial features."
This violates Article 31 of the Trademark Law, Jordan also asserted a claim for portrait right against Qiaodan Sports' logo. However, prosecutors argued that "the Qiaodan's logo does not infringe on Jordan's portraiture rights because it lacks distinguishable facial features."