Great Wall Network, April 23 (Reporter Cai Hongpo and Li Xiangbo) On the morning of April 23, the Provincial Court held a press conference to inform the Hebei Courts on the judicial protection of intellectual property rights in 2018, and released the top ten models of judicial protection of intellectual property rights in 2018. Case.
Provincial Court Press Conference to Report on the Judicial Protection Status of Intellectual Property Rights in Hebei Province in 2018 Photo by Great Wall New Media Reporter Cai Hongpo
Specifically, in 2018, the province’s intermediate courts accepted a total of 2,852 new first-instance intellectual property cases, up from 1,013 in 2017 The number of cases increased by 181.54%; 2,608 cases were concluded, an increase of 156.44% from 1,017 cases in 2017, and the number of closed cases increased significantly.
Among the 2,852 new first-instance intellectual property cases accepted by courts across the province, 500 were involved in patent rights (30 invention patents, utility models, ,245, and 225 designs), 628 trademark rights, 1,225 copyrights, and illegal There were 41 competitions, 5 new plant varieties, and 370 franchises.
Provincial courts newly accepted 256 second-instance intellectual property civil cases, an increase of 24.27% from 206 cases in 2017; and concluded 250 cases, an increase of 21.36% from 206 cases in 2017. Among the 256 new intellectual property second-instance cases accepted by the provincial courts, 44 involved patent rights (7 invention patents, 21 utility models, 16 designs), 72 trademark rights, 90 copyrights, and 14 unfair competition cases. , 15 technology contracts, 4 new plant varieties, and 14 franchise contracts.
On February 6, 2018, the General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the General Office of the State Council issued the "Opinions on Strengthening Reform and Innovation in the Field of Intellectual Property Trial". This is the first top-level design and key plan carried out by the central government specifically for a specific trial field. It is of great importance. milestone significance.
The Third Civil Division of the Provincial Court studied and formulated the "Implementation Opinions on Several Issues Concerning Strengthening Reform and Innovation in the Field of Intellectual Property Trial" in our province, which were issued and implemented throughout the province in the form of documents from the General Office of the Provincial Party Committee and the General Office of the Provincial Government.
At the same time, as the protection of intellectual property rights in our province has continued to increase in recent years, the number of series of cases accepted by our province has shown an obvious upward trend.
In this regard, the Provincial Court has held special meetings to discuss the issues of trial standards and referee standards on many occasions, and actively responded to the opinions of lower courts on trial standards and referee standards, striving to reach a broad consensus and unify the referee standards;
Secondly, it attaches great importance to court openings and Organize the demonstration and legal popularization role of mediation, and actively use the court hearing and mediation stages to popularize the law among the parties, so as to avoid business losses caused by the parties' weak awareness of intellectual property rights;
The third is to further increase the protection of intellectual property rights on the basis of considering a series of rights protection costs, For cases where the circumstances are serious and the malicious infringement is obvious, the amount of compensation shall be determined strictly to deter the infringement from the source and reduce the phenomenon of infringement.
Attachment: Top Ten Typical Cases of Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property Rights in Hebei Courts (2018)
Guilin Zhou’s Shunfa Food Co., Ltd. and Beijing Peking University Founder Electronics Co., Ltd.’s case of dispute over infringement of property rights of other works
Hebei Shenzhou Insulation Building Materials Group Co., Ltd. v. Hebei Shenzhou Rubber Plastic Products Co., Ltd.’s case of infringement of corporate name (trade name) rights
Unfair competition dispute case between Cangzhou De’an Explosion-proof Special Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd. and Hebei Zhongbo Explosion-proof Tools Group Co., Ltd.
Luzhou Laojiao Co., Ltd. and Cui Qingsheng’s infringement of trademark rights Dispute case
Henan Jiuren Food Co., Ltd. and Hemo Mill Beverage Technology Co., Ltd. Trademark infringement dispute case
Bonnet Trisevere Co., Ltd. and Shijiazhuang Sanyang Industry and Trade Co., Ltd., Beiguo Mall Co., Ltd. Yiyou Department Store Case of dispute over trademark infringement by a branch
Case of dispute over trademark infringement between Yunchang Hardware Tools Co., Ltd. and Anping County Xinao Metal Products Co., Ltd.
Qian'an Case about dispute over technical service contract between Jinjiang Hotel and Zhejiang Kewei Energy Saving Technology Co., Ltd.
The dispute over the trademark rights transfer contract between Shexian Wahuangguan Trading Co., Ltd. and Handan Kangrun Pure Water Co., Ltd.
The dispute over the utility model patent infringement between Yuan Desheng Plastic Electronics (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. and Hebei Beangjie Electronic Technology Co., Ltd.
Case excerpts
Bonnet Trisevenol Co., Ltd. vs. Shijiazhuang Sanyo Industry and Trade Co., Ltd. and Beiguo Mall Co., Ltd. Yiyou Department Store Branch's trademark infringement dispute case
[Basic facts of the case]
Bonnet company is a French clothing company The company's " Montagut " series of trademarks have a high reputation in China and have been recognized as well-known trademarks.
Not all the goods involved in the case sold by Yiyou Department Store and Sanyo Company were authentic clothing involved. They contained counterfeit products, and there were situations where genuine and fake products were mixed and sold, which infringed on the trademark rights of Bonnet Company involved in the case.
Yiyou Department Store provides business premises, sales invoices, etc. to Sanyo Company, and bears joint and several liability for Sanyo Company's infringement of trademark rights.
[Judge Summary]
The court held after trial that Sanyo had an authorized distribution relationship with Bonnet and had purchased the clothing products involved in the case from Bonnet's agents. However, not all the goods involved in the case sold by Sanyo were genuine. Among them Contains counterfeit products, and there are situations where real and fake products are mixed and sold;
As for whether the goods involved in the dispute are authentic clothing involved, the evidence submitted by Sanyo Company cannot prove that the accused infringing products have a legally authorized source, and the query information of the China Commodity Information Service Platform It shows that the products involved in the case sold by Sanyo contain counterfeit products, and its behavior of selling counterfeit products infringes upon the exclusive rights of the registered trademark involved in the case, and it should bear the liability to stop the infringement and compensate for the infringement.
Yiyou Department Store failed to fulfill its reasonable review and management obligations and provided Sanyo with business premises and other convenient conditions, and should bear joint and several liability for compensation.
Regarding the amount of compensation, it was finally determined that the amount of compensation in this case was 50,000 yuan.
[Analysis]
In this case, the registered trademark involved in the Bonnet Company has been recognized as a well-known trademark and has a high reputation in China;
Sanyo Company, in order to obtain illegal profits, mixed and sold counterfeit products with genuine products, and the products involved in the case were sold Not all of the goods were authentic clothing involved, and there were situations where genuine and fake products were mixed and sold with the intention of misleading consumers;
The court of second instance determined that it constituted trademark infringement, which effectively cracked down on the trademark infringement of genuine and fake products and protected the trademark in accordance with the law. The legitimate rights and interests of rights holders and consumers, especially embodying the equal protection of foreign parties in accordance with the law.
