When an Influencer’s Nickname Becomes a Competitive Asset: Lessons from a Chinese Unfair Competition Case

Articles
IP CHINA
livestreaming

By Skye Zou

Live-streaming commerce has transformed the way products are marketed in China. Influencers introduce and recommend products in real time, and their personal reputation can quickly translate into commercial success for the items they promote. As a result, the names and nicknames used by popular streamers are no longer just online identities; they can become valuable commercial identifiers in the marketplace.

A recent decision by the Shanghai Changning District People's Court illustrates how Chinese courts are beginning to address this phenomenon. The case examined whether using a well-known streamer’s nickname in product listings without permission can constitute unfair competition.

Notably, with the official implementation of the newly revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the “New Anti-Unfair Competition Law”) in 2025, cases involving new types of identifiers in the digital economy now have clearer legal grounds for application and stronger protection.

A Dispute Born from Live-Streaming Commerce

The dispute revolved around a live-streaming account known as “Qiu Jie,” short for a popular influencer whose full online handle translates roughly to “Sister Qiu Who Married into Miao Village.” 

The account was operated by an e-commerce service company, and the company’s legal representative hosted live streams promoting various products. Over time, the account accumulated more than 800,000 followers and millions of likes, building a substantial audience in the online retail space.

Among the products promoted through the account was a ginger-based shampoo set marketed as “Qiu Jie Customized.” The product performed well commercially, reportedly generating significant monthly sales through the platform linked to the influencer’s account.

 

The conflict emerged when another online seller began offering the same type of shampoo on an e-commerce platform under a product title that included the phrase “Qiu Jie Exclusive.” The seller also used promotional videos that appeared to be identical to those created by the influencer’s account.

Sales records showed that the product listing had existed for nearly two years. During that time, the product title had been revised multiple times, sometimes referencing the influencer directly, sometimes using broader phrases such as “exclusive for streamers.” 

By the time the platform eventually removed the listing, more than 120,000 units had reportedly been sold, generating revenue exceeding one million yuan.

The company behind the original account filed suit, arguing that the unauthorized use of “Qiu Jie” and the copied promotional content misled consumers into believing the products were associated with the influencer’s brand.

Core Controversy: Is a Streamer’s Nickname a Protectable Identifier?

One of the central legal questions was whether the nickname “Qiu Jie” could qualify as a protected commercial identifier under China’s Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China.

The New Anti-Unfair Competition Law further specifies and broadens the scope of protection for “commercial identifiers,” with increased emphasis on identifiers that have developed in the digital economy and serve to distinguish the source of goods or services.

Traditionally, this protection has covered elements such as company names, product packaging, or well-known trade names. However, digital commerce has introduced new forms of identifiers. Online nicknames, social-media handles, and influencer branding can now perform the same market-signaling function as traditional trademarks or trade names.

The court accepted that the nickname “Qiu Jie,” although informal in origin, had acquired commercial significance. Through extensive live-streaming activities and product promotion, the name had become closely associated with specific goods in the minds of consumers. Evidence such as follower counts, engagement metrics, and sales performance helped demonstrate that the nickname had developed real influence in the marketplace.

In other words, the nickname had evolved into a recognizable commercial sign. This aligns with the characteristics of “commercial identifiers with certain influence” under the framework of the New Anti-Unfair Competition Law.

Why the Court Found Unfair Competition

The court ultimately concluded that the seller’s conduct constituted a misleading commercial practice.

 

By incorporating “Qiu Jie” into the product title and pairing it with the influencer’s promotional videos, the seller created the impression that the goods were recommended by, affiliated with, or authorized by the influencer.

In the context of live-streaming commerce, where consumers often rely on a streamer’s endorsement as a purchasing signal, such references can significantly influence purchasing decisions.

The court noted that influencer marketing inherently creates a link between a streamer’s identity and the products they promote. When a consumer encounters a product labeled with the name of a well-known streamer, the natural assumption is that the product is connected to that person’s recommendation or brand.

By exploiting that association, the seller effectively attempted to benefit from the goodwill built by the influencer without authorization. This type of conduct is commonly described in Chinese legal practice as “free-riding: taking advantage of another party’s reputation to attract customers.

The court therefore held that the conduct was likely to cause consumer confusion and fell within the scope of prohibited acts under the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. The defendant was ordered to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses and enforcement expenses.

Why This Case Matters

This decision reflects a broader shift in how courts evaluate commercial identifiers in the digital economy.

In traditional retail markets, a brand’s recognition typically developed slowly through advertising, distribution networks, and long-term marketing efforts. Online environments, however, operate differently. A streamer with engaging content and a loyal audience can build significant market influence in a relatively short period of time.

As a result, online identifiers (usernames, nicknames, and social-media account names) can rapidly become valuable assets. Once consumers begin associating those identifiers with specific products or services, they may deserve legal protection similar to that afforded to traditional business names.

Recent legislative developments in China reinforce this trend. Updates to the Anti-Unfair Competition framework have explicitly acknowledged that new types of digital identifiers, including social-media account names, may function as commercial signs in the marketplace. Courts are therefore increasingly willing to examine whether such identifiers have gained sufficient recognition to justify protection.

Understanding “Confusion” in the Online Marketplace

Another important lesson from the case relates to how courts assess consumer confusion in digital settings.

Online shoppers rarely analyze product listings in detail. Instead, they rely on quick visual impressions to make rapid purchasing decisions. Even small similarities can therefore influence perception.

In the case at hand, the combination of the influencer’s nickname, the copied promotional video, and the sale of the same type of product created an overall impression of association. From a consumer’s perspective, it would not be unreasonable to assume that the listing referred to goods recommended or endorsed by the influencer.

This broader contextual analysis is increasingly common in Chinese unfair competition cases. Rather than focusing on a single element such as whether a particular word is unique, courts tend to evaluate the overall presentation and the likely reaction of ordinary consumers.

The Growing Value of Online Identities

 

The dispute also highlights an emerging reality of digital commerce: online personalities are becoming brand assets in their own right.

For influencers and companies that operate live-streaming accounts, a nickname or account name can embody reputation, consumer trust, and marketing value. Unauthorized use of those identifiers may therefore affect not only brand image but also market competition.

At the same time, the case serves as a caution for online sellers. Using references to popular influencers in product titles or marketing materials may seem like an effective way to attract attention, but it can also cross the line into unlawful conduct if it creates a misleading impression of endorsement.

A Sign of the Times

Ultimately, the decision reflects the legal system’s effort to keep pace with the rapidly evolving digital marketplace. As commerce moves further into social media and live-streaming environments, the boundaries of brand identity continue to expand.

What once functioned merely as an online nickname can now carry significant economic value and, increasingly, legal protection as well: Reputation built online can become a legally recognized competitive asset, and attempting to ride on someone else’s digital identity may lead to liability.