The briefing of the press conference
Six typical cases
Case 1: How to deal with the trademark and font size disputes of three "wife roast chicken" in Luohe for many years
Case summary
(picture source from the Internet)
Since the 1970s, Zhou and Wan have been transferred to operate the "Hui Renjiao Chicken Shop". In 1994, Zhou applied for an individual business license for his wife roast chicken restaurant at the Industrial and Commercial Bureau, and continued to operate the processing and sales of roast chicken. Since 2005, he has been successively recognized as "Luohe Famous Food", "Henan Famous Food", "Central Yuan Famous Food", "Central Yuan Famous Food", "Chinese Famous Food", etc. Zhou obtained the appearance design patent certificate of "Packaging Bag (Wife Roast Chicken)" in 2007 and registered the "Wife Roast Chicken and Picture" combination trademark in 2008. In 2012, the trademark was transferred to the Wife Roast Chicken Store. In 2015, the wife roast chicken shop registered and obtained the "wife roast chicken" text trademark.
Wife Roast Chicken Company was established in January 2005 and has successively established four branches. The development zone Lao Wife Roast Chicken Store was registered as an individual business owner in May 2012. The founder and actual operator of the wife roast chicken company, the development zone roast chicken shop are relatives of other former operators of the "Hui Jiao Chicken Shop" except Zhou. In daily operations, the Wife Roast Chicken Company and its branches and Wife Roast Chicken Store in the development zone highlights the words "Wife Roast Chicken" on its store signs and product packaging bags. The font is significantly larger than other words in the company name, and its stores and products are introduced and promoted with the words "Wife Roast Chicken". Some stores have plaques of "Wife Roast Chicken, Famous Snacks" or words such as "Luohe Famous Food", "Famous Snacks", and "Old Brands".
After the court's trial, the court ruled: 1. The wife roast chicken company and the wife roast chicken shop in the development zone immediately stopped using the company name improperly. The respective company name should be used in standardized operation. The words "wife roast chicken" shall not be used prominently or separately in trademarks such as signboards, product packaging, decoration and advertising; 2. The wife roast chicken company compensates the wife roast chicken shop for losses and reasonable expenses of 100,000 yuan; 3. The wife roast chicken shop in the development zone compensates the wife roast chicken shop for losses and reasonable expenses of 20,000 yuan; 4. The wife roast chicken shop in the development zone stops using the company name containing "wife roast chicken". Neither party appealed.
Typical significance
Wife roast chicken products are well-known snacks with a very well-known reputation in Luohe. The "Wife roast chicken" trademark is one of the more influential well-known trademarks in Luohe and is also a local food brand that Luohe focuses on cultivating as a "famous food city in China". Before the founding of the wife roast chicken brand, Zhou had jointly run the "Hui Jiao Chicken Shop" with other diversion personnel from the Hongqi Carton Factory on Malu Street. Other personnel and their relatives claimed that the wife roast chicken store is a continuation of the Hui Jiao Chicken Shop. The participants are all co-founders of the "Wi Jiao Chicken" brand and have the right to continue to use it. The court passed the trial and determined that the exclusive trademark rights enjoyed by my wife’s roast chicken shop should be protected by law. The wife roast chicken company and its branches and development zones have used the words "wife roast chicken" in its business name as a trademark, which infringes on the exclusive trademark rights of the wife roast chicken store. Through the trial of this case, the dispute over the "wife roast chicken" brand that has attracted a lot of attention from the local society was basically cleared. The parties accepted the judgment and stopped the lawsuit in the first instance, which had a good response in society and had a good effect on the judicial protection of local intellectual property rights.
Case 2: How could the "ink" sold at 5 yuan per bottle infringement?
Case summary
(Pictures are from the Internet)
The plaintiff Beijing Yidege Moye Co., Ltd. approved the registration of the "Yidege" text trademark in 1984 and approved the registration of the "Yidege and Tu" combination trademark in 2002. After long-term use and promotion, the "Yidege" brand has been widely recognized by relevant consumers and has won a series of honors.In May 2018, Yidege Company sent people to several stationery stores in Luohe City to notarize the purchase of ink marked "Yidege". After identification, 14 of the operators sold the "Yidege" ink was not produced by Yidege Company. Later, the lawsuit was filed in court and demanded that each defendant stop infringement and compensate for the losses. Among them, a bottle of ink purchased at a bookstore in Yuanhui District, Luohe City is only priced at 5 yuan. After trial, the physical items for notarization will be sealed and purchased in comparison with the genuine products. The words "Yidge" in the 100 grams of ink are the same as the font of the text logo of Yidege Company No. 209837. The graphic logo of "Yidge" is the same or similar to the font, arrangement and graphic elements of the graphic logo of Yidege Company No. 1926226. However, the workmanship is rough and there is a difference in details from the genuine product. It is a counterfeit product.
During the trial process of the court, based on the actual situation of each case, and collected similar cases from other courts, they adopted the "one-to-one, back-to-back" approach of in-court mediation many times, and patiently defended the law and analyzed the theory. In the end, 11 cases were settled by the plaintiff and defendant. Three companies disagree to mediation, among which the court ruled after trial: 1. A bookstore in Yuanhui District, Luohe City immediately stopped selling goods that infringed on the plaintiff's exclusive right to register trademarks; 2. A bookstore in Yuanhui District, Luohe City compensated the plaintiff's economic losses and reasonable expenses in total within ten days from the date of the effectiveness of this judgment. Neither parties to the judgment appealed.
Typical meaning
Currently, there are a large number of individual business owners on the market. Due to the limitation of legal knowledge, they are greedy for money and profit, and they do not strictly control their purchasing channels. They arbitrarily distribute some small commodities with high degree of counterfeitness, resulting in infringement of the exclusive right to register trademarks during their operations. Through the trial of such cases, in the form of typical cases, individual business owners should be warned to "don't do evil in small ways" and should fulfill the obligation of prudent care granted by the law, regulate their business behavior, and must purchase goods from formal channels. The court ruled that the operators bear corresponding legal responsibilities, which not only protected the legitimate rights and interests of trademark owners, but more importantly, protected the legitimate rights and interests of the general public to purchase "authentic products".
Case 3: Snack restaurants use "big-faced chicken chops" store signs, why do you have to pay first?
Case summary
(Pictures are from the Internet)
Peter Face Company was founded in 2009. "big-faced chicken chops" is its most well-known product and has been highly recognized by the public nationwide. Its brand has a high reputation and reputation in the market. Pigfes enjoys exclusive rights to the "Big Face Chicken Steak" series trademark. , a snack shop in Yicheng District, used a graphic logo similar to the registered trademark of "Big Face Chicken Steak" on its storefront and on the fast food packaging sold without the authorization of Bigefes, causing confusion among consumers about the use of "Big Face Chicken Steak" registered trademark stores and products.
After trial, the court held that the behavior of a snack bar in Yuanhui District infringed on the exclusive right of the relevant registered trademark of Bigefes Company and should bear civil liability for stopping infringement and compensating for losses in accordance with the law. The court decided that the defendant should compensate Bigefes Company for economic losses (including reasonable expenses) of RMB 13,000. The plaintiff and defendant accepted the verdict and stopped the lawsuit, and neither appealed.
Typical significance
There are a large number of self-employed individuals in the market. Due to the limitation of legal knowledge, there is a misunderstanding of the use of trademarks and the significance of registered trademarks, which leads to infringement of the exclusive right of registered trademarks in business, and at the same time damages one's own interests. It is urgent to use typical cases to warn the majority of self-employed individuals to distinguish the difference between trademarks and registered trademarks when using trademarks, as well as the serious consequences of infringement of the exclusive right of registered trademarks.
Food safety is a hot issue that the people are concerned about. Since the "big-faced chicken chops" sold by Pigfez and its authorized franchise stores are very popular among consumers, there are a large number of counterfeit and counterfeit "big-faced chicken chops" registered trademarks in Luohe City and surrounding areas. The quality of fast foods sold by them is uneven, which is very likely to infringe on the health of consumers. It is necessary to regulate the fast food business market through legal means to protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
Case 4: If the amount of fake products is produced is large, be careful to be sentenced
Case summary
(Pictures are from the Internet)
From April 2017 to August 2017, Zhao provided a factory in his home in a village in Yancheng District, Luohe City as a production site. He colluded with the defendants Li Xiao and Li Guomou to produce beverages with the registered trademarks of "pulsation", "screaming", "Nongfu Spring (tea)π" and "black card 6 hours" without authorization. On August 18, 2017, the Shabei Branch of Luohe Municipal Public Security Bureau destroyed the counterfeiting den and seized 2,326 boxes of pulsating sports drinks, 448 boxes of Nongfu Spring Screaming Drinks, 1,162 boxes of Nongfu Spring Tea π drinks, and 210 boxes of black card 6-hour drinks at the production site. After verification, it was found that the above beverages were all products that infringe on the exclusive right of registered trademarks, with a total value of 204,534 yuan after identification.
After trial, the court held that Zhao, Li Xiao, Rui, and Li Guomou used the same trademark as their registered trademark on the same product without the permission of the registered trademark owner, and the circumstances were particularly serious, and their actions constituted the crime of counterfeiting a registered trademark. Zhao, Li Xiao, Rui, and Li Guo were co-offenders. In this joint crime, Zhao played a major role and was the main culprit; Li Xiao, Rui, and Li Guo played a minor role and were accomplices, and should be reduced in punishment. Given that the four people have a good attitude of admitting guilt and are willing to repent, they have the conditions for community correction, and will be given a lighter punishment as appropriate and probation will be applied. Judgment: Zhao was convicted of the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks of , sentenced to , sentenced to three years in prison, three years of probation, and fined RMB 110,000; Li Xiao was convicted of counterfeiting registered trademarks of 2 years in prison, two years of probation, and fined RMB 60,000; Rui was convicted of counterfeiting registered trademarks of 2 years in prison, two years of probation, and fined RMB 60,000; Li Guo was convicted of counterfeiting registered trademarks of 2 years in prison, two years of probation, and fined RMB 60,000; Li Guo was convicted of counterfeiting registered trademarks of 1 year in prison, one year of probation, and fined RMB 40,000; one automatic filling machine, one laser coder, one water filter, and two mixers were confiscated and handed over to the state treasury.
Typical significance
Food safety is more important than mountain. "Nongfu Spring" is a trademark with high popularity in the beverage market. Zhao and other defendants deliberately created beverages that counterfeit Nongfu Spring trademark and sold them to the public, infringing on the legitimate rights and interests of the exclusive owner of the registered trademark, posed a major food safety hazard, and also affected the rights and interests of consumers. The defendant's production and sale of counterfeit Nongfu Spring trademarks is relatively large, and he has obvious criminal intent. The court has increased the punishment in accordance with the law. While sentenced to imprisonment, it imposed a higher fine in accordance with the law. While giving full play to the legal punishment, it also ordered the confiscation of production equipment, eradicating the criminal basis, purifying the food production market, and demonstrating the judicial zero-tolerance attitude towards intellectual property crimes.
Case 5: How can you make such a big deal if you sell a "three-no" toy?
Case summary
Plaintiff Guangdong Yongsheng Animation Co., Ltd. is the registered trademark right holder of the "Anime Cartoon Image + GG•BOND" combination trademark and the " Pig Pig Hero " art text combination trademark, and is also the copyright holder of the animation images "Pig Hero", "Super Man Qiang", "Xiao Daidai", "Fifei" and other art works. In March 2017, Yongsheng Animation Company sent someone to a toy store in Guangming Road Market, Luohe City to notarize a Zhuzhu fighter toy with the words "Pig Man" and related cartoon graphics printed on it, which cost 25 yuan. The plaintiff filed two lawsuits for one toy product for infringement of trademark rights and infringement of other copyright property rights.
After trial, the court held that the product packaging had the words "Pig Pig Man" and the combination of "Anime Cartoon Image + GG•BOND", and also had the images of "Pig Man", "Super Man", "Fefei", and "Xiao Daidai". The product is a "three-no" product (no manufacturer, no production date, no quality certificate). A toy shop refused to mediate after the court, and the court made a judgment on the infringement of trademark rights: 1. Immediately stop selling goods that infringe on the plaintiff's exclusive right to register trademarks; 2. Compensate the plaintiff's economic losses of 5,000 yuan. After another mediation, the two parties settled the case of infringing on the property rights of other copyrights.
Typical meaning
First of all, the operator in this case had the act of selling "three no" products. This act itself is an act prohibited by law. The subjective fault is very obvious, and the industrial and commercial administrative department should investigate and deal with it. Secondly, the product infringes on the plaintiff's trademark rights and copyright respectively, and the plaintiff can claim legal protection for his legal rights. Although the plaintiff filed two lawsuits against a product with different rights, the court will still consider the nature, circumstances, business scale and other factors during the trial. At the same time, the respective compensation amount will be determined according to the different provisions of the Trademark Law and the Copyright Law.
Case 6: Why did the court start "same" cases different?
Case summary
(Pictures are from the Internet)
The plaintiff Fujian Heng'an Group Co., Ltd. is the authorized use of the registered trademarks of "Anerle", " Seven Degree Space ", " Heart Episode ", "Soft Shadow", and "Heng'an" series of registered trademarks and serve as the right holder. It is the earliest company in China to produce paper handkerchiefs, boxed paper and other daily necessities, and enjoys a good reputation in the industry. In April 2018, Hengan Group Company sent people to several stores in Luohe City to notarize the purchase of products involved in the case with the words "Seven Degree Space" and "Heart Eye Printing". It was identified that the products sold by five operators were not produced by the plaintiff, but were counterfeit products, infringing on the plaintiff's exclusive right to register trademarks.
After trial, the court ruled to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses of 12,000 yuan for operators who infringed the registered trademark of "Seven Degrees Space"; and to operators who infringed the registered trademark of "Xinxiangyin", the plaintiff for economic losses of 8,000 yuan. The plaintiff and defendant accepted the verdict and stopped the lawsuit, and neither appealed.
Typical meaning
When courts hear cases of the same type, they generally need to consider the issue of the unity of the judgment standards, try to avoid "different judgments in the same case" and maintain the credibility of the judicial system to the greatest extent. The compensation amounts of the above two judgments are largely different because: the products registered with "Seven Degree Space" are sanitary napkins, sanitary pads, etc., while the products registered with "Xinxiangyin" are paper towels, paper napkins, hand wipes, soft wipes, etc. The potential harm of counterfeit products to human health is different. It is urgent to use typical cases to warn individual business owners to operate honestly and try to avoid serious consequences.
