Recently, the civil first-instance judgment of the name rights dispute between Huang Bo and Shandong Dingweikang Organic Food Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Dingweikang Company") was announced.
According to the first instance judgment, Dingweikang Company was sentenced to compensate the plaintiff Huang Bo for economic losses of 1 million yuan and the cost of rights protection of 2,820 yuan.
Public information shows that Shandong Dingweikang Organic Food Co., Ltd. was established in December 2019 with a registered capital of 8 million yuan. The legal representative is Chen Fulai. The business scope includes sales and online sales: pre-packaged food , bulk food industry.
Court found:
Huang Bo's portrait rights and name rights have been infringed
Court found that Huang Bo's film and television actors; the defendant is operating in business management consulting, business information consulting, sales and online sales of pre-packaged food and bulk food. scope of other limited liability companies. The right holder of the Dingweikang trademark is Shandong Kangba Food Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Kangba Company"). Kangba Company authorizes Dingweikang Company to use the Dingweikang trademark in the production and sales of product .
Huang Bo claims that Dingweikang Company, without Huang Bo's authorization, has unauthorized the outer packaging of various products such as the "Dingweikang" brand Japanese small round cakes, Xiaomi pancakes , Japanese small black cakes and other products sold by him without permission. Huang Bo's portrait and name are used in prominent positions, and the materials are made and distributed to more than 40 entities such as group buyers and distributors, and are attached with "Brand spokesperson: Huang Bo" and "The famous actor Huang Bo also loves The texts of "Huang Bo endorsing Xiaomi Pancakes" and other words were promoted, infringing on Huang Bo's portrait rights and name rights.
Dingweikang Company claims that its right to use Huang Bo's portrait and name on the products involved in the lawsuit is as follows: Guangzhou Shengshi Huanyu Film and Television Culture Media Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Shengshi Company") authorizes Shanghai Hengyan Food Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as " Hengyan Company) uses the finished audio-visual products and promotional pictures and posters of the movie "101 Marriage Proposal". Hengyan Company can choose to promote the "Lucky Bear" brand for random gift discs; Hengyan Company authorizes Dingweikang Company to sell Promote products that use the "Lucky Bear" trademark.
Huang Bo said that Hengyan Company and Dingweikang Company have never been authorized to use Huang Bo's portrait and name. The portrait pictures used by Dingweikang Company are not Huang Bo's image in the movie "101 Marriage Proposal ", but Huang Bo Photos taken for the endorsement of the New Oriental brand.
In addition, Huang Bo sent a lawyer's letter to Dingweikang Company on April 1, 2020, but Dingweikang Company did not stop the infringement after receiving the lawyer's letter. on the Internet There are still a large amount of product sales information related to litigation issued by Dingweikang Company or Dingweikang Company authorized sellers, and the infringement consequences are further expanded.
The court held that the portrait rights and name rights of natural persons are protected by law, and that the portraits of citizens shall not be used for profit without their consent.
In this case, based on the facts found, it can be seen that Dingweikang Company has used Huang Bo's portrait and name in many food packaging produced and sold without permission, and authorized multiple distributors to use the multiple products through Dingweikang Company's behavior has the obvious characteristics of using portraits and names for profit, which constitutes an infringement of Huang Bo's portrait rights and name rights.
Infringer: 1 million yuan of compensation is too much!
Court: The losses claimed by Huang Bo are not improper
It is worth noting that for Huang Bo's economic losses claimed by 1 million yuan, Dingweikang Company stated that the scope of the company's infringement of portrait rights is limited and it is impossible to cause 1 million to Huang Bo. RMB economic losses.
Dingweikang Company has been established less than a year ago. It has encountered the epidemic since its establishment and its operating foundation is very weak. Dingweikang Company also started to produce and sell products that use film copyright promotion after being commissioned by Hengyan Company. The sales time is not By two months, no profit was created, and the packaging materials recalled and destroyed reached more than 100,000 yuan, so Dingweikang Company was indeed unable to pay such high compensation. , but in order to express his apology, Dingweikang Company is willing to pay Huang Bo 30,000 yuan as compensation.
In order to prove Huang Bo's commercial endorsement value, Huang Bo submitted the "Advertising Endorsement Contract" and "Consultation Services" signed by Shanghai Zhengxin Food Co., Ltd. (Party A) and Shanghai Hanna Film and Television Culture Media Co., Ltd. (Party B) and "Consultation Services" signed by Shanghai Zhengxin Food Co., Ltd. (Party A) and Shanghai Hanna Film and Television Culture Media Co., Ltd. (Party B) Contract, invoice. "Advertising Endorsement Contract" shows that Party A hired Party B's artist Huang Bo as the image spokesperson of Party A's " Zhengxin Chicken Steak " product. The endorsement period was from April 1, 2018 to March 31, 2020, and the endorsement fee was *** million yuan.
Dingweikang Company stated that the company was established for a short time and the sales of products involved in litigation were short, so it did not create much profit. Moreover, Dingweikang Company only used Huang Bo's portrait, which was different from the rights and obligations of endorsement and could not be based on the endorsement fee standard. Determine the amount of compensation.
The court held that regarding economic losses, Huang Bo as an entertainer has a high social reputation, and his portrait and name have certain commercial value. Dingweikang Company's infringement of Huang Bo's portrait rights and name rights will inevitably lead to Huang Bo's infringement of Huang Bo's portrait rights and name rights. The economic benefits contained in portraits and names are damaged.
on the specific amount of compensation, Dingweikang Company's use of Huang Bo's portrait and name can easily make the general public mistakenly believe that there is a brand endorsement relationship between Huang Bo and Dingweikang Company. comprehensively considers Huang Bo's professional identity and endorsement remuneration , the specific infringement circumstances and degree of fault of Dingweikang Company, the court held that the amount of economic losses claimed by Huang Bo was not improper, so it supported the request.
data picture/Visual China
Enterprises frequently "touching porcelain" stars
First wave after wave of celebrity rights protection
Recently, a group of celebrities have gathered to sue companies for infringement. Looking at the infringement disputes surrounding celebrities, which arise because of "being endorsed". Disputes on reputation rights and portrait rights account for a considerable part.
On June 8 this year, Xiao Zhan sued Shenzhen Lihongyuan Trading Co., Ltd. and Yiwu Ruijing Glasses Co., Ltd. for unauthorized use of his portrait and name for the promotion and promotion of stores and products, and maliciously edited pictures. The court ruled that the act violated his portrait rights and won the case. Lihongyuan Company and Ruijing Glasses Company need to immediately delete the content of infringing on Xiao Zhan's portrait rights, apologize and compensate Xiao Zhan with more than 58,000 yuan and more than 40,000 yuan respectively.
htmlOn June 6, the first instance legal documents for online infringement liability dispute between Dilraba and Guangzhou Yongquan Trading Co., Ltd. were made public. Without the plaintiff's consent, the defendant Yongquan Trading Company used the plaintiff's name and photos in its online store "Original Golden Yongquan Store" and used it as a brand spokesperson for publicity, infringing on the plaintiff's portrait rights and name rights. . Di Lieba needs to be compensated 50,000 yuan and apologize publicly. Previously, Di Lieba has sued the original Golden Camel Milk brand affiliate Guangzhou Yiji Information Technology Co., Ltd. many times for online infringement liability disputes.
For example, Liu Haoran won the case of infringement in the case of suing the food company, and the defendant needs to compensate 300,000 yuan. In May this year, Shuntianyuan Company used Liu Haoran's portrait and signature for the outer packaging of its products without Liu Haoran's permission, infringing on his portrait rights and name rights. Shuntianyuan Company needs to compensate Liu Haoran for economic losses and reasonable expenses for rights protection. A total of 300,000 yuan.
For example, JJ Lin sued B station and the up owner, claiming 275,000 yuan.On September 23, 2021, a new delivery announcement was added in the case of portrait rights dispute between JJ Lin and Shanghai Kuanyu Digital Technology Co., Ltd. and Xiao. The details of the announcement show that the plaintiff JJ Lin sued the defendant Shanghai Kuanyu Digital Technology Co., Ltd. and Xiao's portrait rights In the dispute case, the defendant Xiao was requested to order the plaintiff to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses of 250,000 yuan, mental damage compensation of 220,000 yuan, and reasonable expenses of 5,000 yuan, and the above total of 275,000 yuan.
In addition, Yang Mi has also won many infringement cases. Yang Mi Studio posted the rights protection results on Weibo from 2019 to April 2021, including 6 reputation infringement cases and 17 portrait infringement cases, with the maximum compensation amount of 250,000 yuan and the minimum amount of 5,000 yuan.
Source | Yangcheng Evening News
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-