5 Years of Rortix: An Investigative Report on Brand Infringement and the Silence of Dreame Technology

Posted on by admin
5 Years of Rortix: An Investigative Report on Brand Infringement and the Silence of Dreame Technology

Investigative report on Rortix domain registration 2021 and the ongoing brand identity dispute with Dreame Technology over unauthorized use.

Legal Disclaimer: This report is based exclusively on publicly available court dockets, regulatory registries, official publications, media reports, and verifiable commercial records. All factual assertions are supported by source links. The purpose of this publication is to document public records and to raise awareness in the public interest under the principles of fair comment and consumer protection. No allegation of professional misconduct is made beyond what is documented in the public record.

Introduction

In the fast-evolving world of global technology, brand identity serves as the bedrock of consumer trust and commercial integrity. Since May 9, 2021, the Rortix brand has been actively operating, establishing its market presence, and serving consumers through a robust digital and commercial ecosystem. However, recent developments concerning the use of a confusingly similar brand identity by Dreame Technology (追觅科技) have raised serious concerns regarding intellectual property rights, fair trade practices, and corporate accountability.

I am publishing this article today, 59 days after my first legal notice, because I have made every friendly and good-faith effort to reach a resolution since 2 April 2026. Following the active investigation by SAMR (State Administration for Market Regulation) and all other regulatory steps, the probability of taking this matter to court against Dreame is now very high – unless a swift resolution is achieved.

The Foundation: Prior Rights Established in 2021

The Rortix identity is not a recent creation; it is a brand built on five years of continuous effort, strategic planning, and active trade. Registered and operational since 2021, Rortix has maintained:

My identity as the founder and lawful owner of Rortix is publicly verified by Google Knowledge Panel: https://g.co/kgs/XQFYmvx.

These documented efforts establish “Prior Rights” in the marketplace – a principle that is fundamental to global intellectual property protection. Under international trademark law and the Chinese Supreme People’s Court’s established precedents (including the DataFocus and PaperPass cases discussed below), a domain name registered before a later trademark application, combined with active commercial use and public promotion, constitutes a protected “Prior Civil Right.”

The Conflict: Brand Identity Dispute

In March 2026, it came to my attention that Dreame Technology, a major player in the global appliance market, began utilizing a brand identity “RortiX” that phonetically and visually mirrors our established Rortix mark. China Daily independently reported on Dreame’s use of “RortiX” as a brand name for its eVTOL project on 15 March 2026: https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202603/15/WS69b64cb8a310d6866eb3de10.html

However, further investigation reveals that Dreame had already created a Baidu Baike entry for “RortiX” on 12 June 2025 – nine months before I became aware of the infringement in March 2026. The Baidu page claims that “RortiX” is a brand under Dreame Technology, but the page was created on 12 June 2025: https://baike.baidu.com/item/RortiX/67511461

This means Dreame had already prepared the infringing brand identity while Rortix had been operating continuously since 9 May 2021. Dreame did not respond to my legal notices; instead, it remained completely silent for 59 days while continuing to use my stolen brand name. This pattern of pre-planned copying followed by deliberate silence reveals a calculated strategy of willful infringement.

This use of a nearly identical brand name for new technology ventures creates a significant risk of confusion for consumers and dilutes the equity of the brand I have spent years cultivating. When a global entity enters a market using an identity already claimed and actively used by an established prior user, it calls into question the commitment to fair competition and respect for individual innovation.

The Silence: A Call for Accountability (2 April 2026 – 1 June 2026)

The most concerning aspect of this situation is not just the infringement itself, but the lack of substantive engagement from Dreame Technology.

  • On 2 April 2026, I officially notified Dreame, TCab Tech, and Chinese regulators of my prior rights.
  • On 13 May 2026, I provided Dreame’s legal representatives and relevant certification bodies with complete, verified evidence of Dreame’s willful trademark theft.
  • For 59 days (from 2 April 2026 to 1 June 2026) – Dreame’s Legal Department has been COMPLETELY SILENT and has sent ZERO response to any legal notice.
  • WIPO Case No. WIPOM070426 was closed due to Dreame’s non-response.
  • TCab Tech deleted evidence from its official website after receiving my legal warning. The original partnership announcement (“TCab Tech secures 100 aircraft order from RortiX”) was removed – a classic example of evidence spoliation under international civil procedure. The deleted page was previously available at: https://www.tcabtech.com/en/tcab-tech-secures-100-aircraft-order-from-rortix-in-strategic-partnership-to-build-the-global-operating-fleet/

Despite my explicit prohibition, Dreame continues to run WeChat promotions under the infringing “RortiX” name: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/JkpPHnvKa0YT5R9qgDZE2Q

This continued avoidance of a transparent and direct legal discussion is incompatible with the standard of accountability expected from a global technology corporation.

Dreame is a Proven Repeat Offender – Not a First-Time Infringer

Case / EventKey FindingOfficial Source
Ecovacs v. Dreame (24 April 2026) – Suzhou Intermediate CourtMalicious employee poaching (20+ employees) using masks/hats, third-party shell contracts, fake payroll. Court ordered 1 million yuan compensation.https://m.163.com/dy/article/KR9UUIIB05149VTA.html
Tineco v. Dreame (CNIPA Patent Invalidation) – ZL 202122747982.9Patent fully invalidated – official finding that Dreame claimed ownership of existing technology (prior art).https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=206b16d7-eacc-4886-8775-f1cf4f3e239a
Dreame Internal Audit (Q1 2026) – Anti-fraud special investigation23 employees terminated for embezzlement/corruption; 3 arrested for criminal prosecution (Zhang Yazhou, Hao Lundun, Guan Shengjun).https://www.fanwubi.org/Item/209834.aspx
Shanghai Pudong District Court (May 2026)2.32 million yuan equity freeze on Starlink Plan (Shanghai) Automotive – founder Yu Hao holds 77.76% stake.https://baike.baidu.com/en/item/Nebula%20Plan%20(Shanghai)%20Automotive%20Technology%20Co.,%20Ltd./76765
Shenzhen District Court (February 2026)Dreame used a former employee as a corporate spy to collect competitor trade secrets.Attached PDF Section 5 (Regulator File)

A company that refuses to respond to legal notices for nearly two months, that has been convicted of organised employee poaching using masks and shell companies, that has had its own patents invalidated for claiming ownership of third-party technology, and that has terminated 23 employees for corruption while three others were arrested – cannot be considered a legitimate or trustworthy commercial partner.

Chinese Legal Precedent: Prior Domain Registration as a Protected Civil Right

Under established Chinese Supreme Court precedent, a previously registered domain name coupled with active commercial use constitutes a protected “Prior Civil Right.”

DataFocus Case – (2024) Zui Gao Fa Xing Zai No. 244 (Supreme People’s Court Gazette, 18 December 2025):

  • Domain “datafocus.ai” was registered in 2017
  • After active use (600+ enterprise users, multi-platform promotion) → recognised fame
  • The Supreme Court ruled that a later identical trademark must be invalidated for damaging the prior domain right

PaperPass Case – Beijing Intellectual Property Court (2019):

  • Domain “paperpass.org” was registered in 2008
  • Active commercial use before the later “PaperPass” trademark application
  • The Court ruled that the later mark must be invalidated for damaging the prior domain right

Both rulings clarify: when a domain is registered AND used commercially before a later trademark application, the later mark is invalid. The Rortix domain was registered on 9 May 2021 and has been in continuous commercial use ever since – years before Dreame’s adoption of “RortiX” in March 2026.

Chinese courts and the public may verify these rulings at the official gazette:

Independent Regulatory Verification – SAMR (State Administration for Market Regulation)

I have filed formal trademark infringement complaints against Dreame with the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) of China.

The SAMR investigation is active. The public is invited to independently verify these filings through the official channels listed above. No further comment on the status of the investigation will be made at this time.

A Call for Fairness and Transparency

I am not merely defending a name; I am defending the principle that originality and early entry into a market must be respected.

What I have done to protect my brand:

  • Publicly documented Rortix’s continuous operation since 9 May 2021 through WHOIS, independent media, social media, YouTube, Facebook, and an active Android application.
  • Filed formal complaints with SAMR (China) and other regulatory bodies where appropriate.
  • Submitted all evidence to the relevant authorities.

What Dreame has done:

  • Remained completely silent for 59 days (2 April 2026 – 1 June 2026).
  • Failed to respond to any legal notice (WIPO case closed due to non-response).
  • Continued WeChat promotions under the infringing “RortiX” name after explicit prohibition.
  • Had its legal department avoid all substantive communication.
  • Saw its partner, TCab Tech, delete evidence after receiving a legal warning.

I believe that innovation should be celebrated, but it must never come at the expense of others’ established rights. As I continue to seek a constructive dialogue, I remain committed to transparency and the protection of the integrity of the Rortix brand.

I urge all stakeholders – regulators, the media, and the public – to reflect on the importance of respecting intellectual property, regardless of the size or influence of the parties involved.

Postscript: A Note on Public Interest and Future Updates

This report is published in the public interest. All information contained herein is based on publicly verifiable records. The question that remains unanswered after 59 days of silence is simple:

Why has a multinational corporation with over 12 international law firms refused to respond to a single legal notice from a small Bangladeshi brand whose prior rights are publicly verifiable in under one minute?

The answer to this question is of significant public interest and newsworthiness. International media have already been informed, and the answer will form part of ongoing investigations.

Future updates to this report will cover those global entities that, after having received actual knowledge of Dreame’s willful trademark infringement, chose to remain associated with Dreame and took no corrective action. Their names and the evidence of their knowledge will be published in due course.

MD Masuk Alam Noton
Founder & Owner, Rortix (since 9 May 2021)
www.rortix.com | WIPO Case No. WIPOM070426
Google Knowledge Panel: https://g.co/kgs/XQFYmvx
inoton74@rortix.com | inoton74@gmail.com

1 June 2026

(All correspondence recorded. All evidence documented and available for independent verification.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *