How Does The Brand Avoid Trademark Disputes And Prevent "Li Gui" From "Li Kui"?

Recently, with the announcement of the first trial verdict of "two brands of tea" and "Cha Yan Guan", the trademark infringement disputes between brands have also been brought to the forefront of public opinion, causing online concern.

Changsha tea is a famous local tea shop in China. Today, it has become one of the special products for visitors to Changsha. Although the tea shop is only opened in Changsha, its influence has spread throughout the country. Local netizens claim that the tea face is even less inferior to the status of Changsha stinky tofu in their hearts.

In May 2019, a tea shop "Cha Yan Guan color" milk tea shop, which was only one word with "tea yam", opened in Changsha. As a result, "Guangzhou tea color" registered trademark exclusive right holder Guangzhou LUOQI company, to Changsha "tea Yan Yue color" trademark infringement, to Changsha Yuelu District people's court prosecution.

Guangzhou LUOQI company asked the court to order the "Tea Face Yue color" trademark registrant Hunan tea Yue Restaurant Management Co., Ltd. and authorized users to compensate for its losses of 210 thousand yuan, and issued an apology statement on WeChat public address, micro-blog, public comment and the US group takeaway platform, eliminating adverse effects.

At this point, consumers are puzzled. Why is it so arrogant that a nameless milk tea shop is unknown?

It turned out that in 2008, "Cha Yan Guan color" has been registered, from this point alone, it actually seized the lead in litigation. However, due to the fact that there is no evidence to prove the actual use of the trademark before the first transfer, the consumer awareness is not high and the market influence is not high.

Compared with the fact that the "Tea Face Yue" has been opened for more than 6 years, compared with the fact that the consumers recognized it, the court held that LUOQI company should be aware of its influence as a competitor in the same industry, but still accepted the use of the registered trademark "tea face color", and used it as a right commercial symbol to register a trademark infringement on the registered trademark. In violation of the principle of good faith, the claim should not be supported by the court.

In fact, such cases are not rare. In recent years, many "trademark" disputes have emerged in an endless stream, and there have even been cases of "piracy". Netizens joked this kind of event as "Li Gui told Li Kui!"

　　 "Piracy" wins New Balance, fined 98 million yuan.

The American brand New Balance, known as the king of jogging shoes, has entered the Chinese market. After using the Chinese name of "new brun", it was sent to the court by the owner of Guangzhou's main business men's shoes, surnamed Zhou, and demanded a huge compensation of nearly 100 million yuan.

New Balance Shanghai new hundred Lun company said, "new hundred Lun" is the enterprise name, in the publicity, "new hundred Lun", just as "New Balance" commodity Chinese name, is a good use. Moreover, New Balance's high impact products do not need to imitate Mr. Zhou's low impact products.

Mr. Zhou obtained the "hundred Lun" trademark through the transferee and maliciously snatch "new hundred Lun". The commercial value of the word "new hundred Lun" is New Balance's massive investment in business. In his view, Mr. Zhou did not carry out commercial investment, but he claimed a huge compensation of nearly 100 million yuan by litigation, without any facts and legal basis.

The Guangzhou intermediate people's court held that Shanghai new brun company did not use its enterprise name in an unstandardized way, and did not take the initiative to avoid using the same or similar logo with others' registered trademarks, so as to avoid confusion, misidentification and market disorder of the relevant public. Its use of the word "new hundred Lun" constitutes a violation of Mr. Zhou's "brun" and "new blun" registered trademarks.

The reason is that "new hundred Lun" is neither a "new balance" in the Chinese translation of "New Balance" nor a Chinese transliteration of "New Balance". Its product has been called "new". That is to say, there is no correspondence between new New and Balance.

The case was decided on the first instance. It was found that the New Balance seller had a malicious "reverse confusion" behavior, which constituted a violation of the exclusive right of others to register a trademark. Accordingly, the court made a judgment of the highest amount of compensation for the infringement case in history, and sentenced it to compensation of 98 million yuan.

　　 The "Muji" trademark dispute was defeated by the Japanese side and no rejection was made.

In 2015, Beijing Muji Investment Co., Ltd. and Beijing Cotton Textile Co., Ltd. filed a lawsuit against MUJI, claiming that MUJI used "Muji" trademarks to produce infringing products when producing and selling bedding blankets and other commodities. In December 2017, the court of first instance decided that MUJI had lost the lawsuit and demanded an immediate cessation of the infringement and compensated the economic loss of the other party in excess of 400 thousand yuan.

When the news came out, there was an uproar. For this reason, some foreign media even criticized the backwardness and absurdity of China's trademark law, and experts also complained that Japan's MUJI was unfair. In reason, the loss of Japanese Muji is indeed difficult for the public to understand and accept. However, the conclusion of jurisprudence is a foregone conclusion from a professional point of view.

According to the judgment document, the plaintiff of Beijing cotton field Textile Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as cotton field company) is the owner of the 7494239th "Muji" trademark (hereinafter referred to as the trademark). The trademark was registered in 2001 and approved for use in the twenty-fourth category of "cotton fabric, towels, towel blanket, bath towel, pillow towel, floor towel, bed sheet, pillowcase, quilt, quilt cover, cushion and cushion cover". Goods. Beijing Muji was founded in June 2011, and cotton field is one of its investors.

In June 2011, the cotton field company authorized Beijing Muji to use the trademark in China for the production, sale and promotion of the designated commodity under the trademark.

For the loss of Muji, the legal profession believed that the Japanese Muji did not advance the registration of the trademark before entering the Chinese market, leading to China's "Muji" trademark being first registered in some commodity categories.

China's trademark registration implements the principle of first registration. However, for the purpose of rush registration, China's trademark law has been amended with the thirty-second existing Trademark Law: "trademark registration shall not damage the prior rights of others, nor can it preemptive registration by other improper means."

　　 Jordan sports vs fly Jordan trademark dispute for 8 years.

Regarding China's Jordan sports and Jordan's trademark case, it is recalled that by 2012, Michael Jordan had applied to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and commerce, requesting the withdrawal of 78 related registered trademarks of Jordan sports. At that time, the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce ruled that a series of trademark registration should be maintained in Jordan sports, and then a long struggle for trademark competition began.

It is reported that this dispute is actually a case of "people sue officials". The defendant in the lawsuit is not Jordan sports, but the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and commerce. Jordan sports just appeared as the "third person" in the law.

In May 2015, the higher people's Court of Beijing only made judgments on 32 of them; in 2015 December, the people's court only upgraded 10 cases of public trials, and ruled that the retrial applicants' applications for retrial in 50 other cases were dismissed. Michael Jordangio was not satisfied with the result, so he applied to the Supreme Court for retrial.

In December 2016, after the people's court heard the case, it publicly declared the case of Jordan sports company's registered trademark infringement cases, and judged that the registration of the Chinese "Jordan" trademark infringed upon Michael Jordan's prior right of name, and that Jordan's "Jordan" trademark should be revoked and ordered the trademark review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and commerce to make a ruling again.

Today, the Supreme Court's final judgment also affirms that the first instance and second instance decided that the facts and the applicable laws were wrong and should be revoked. The 6020578 "Jordan + graphic" trademark of Jordan sports company's twenty-fifth categories of clothing, shoes, hat and socks was withdrawn.

In the 8 years of pulling, Michael Jordan finally won his own right, and this dispute case was also selected in the guiding case. In January 2020, the court law made it clear that the Chinese translations of foreign natural persons met the requirements and could be protected according to the law.

　　 Trademark registration "hand speed" is the key.

From the case, whether it is the above tea face, the American New Balance, Japanese Muji, or Michael Jordan all share a common reason for getting into brand disputes, that is, at the beginning of trademark management, the overall layout of the brand was not taken into account. In other words, the speed of "speed" of trademark registration is slow, so that other non famous brands unconsciously or unconsciously find the gap, leading to a series of thorny problems.

The thirty-first law of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates: "two or more than two registered trademark applicants who apply for registration with the same or similar trademark on the same commodity or similar commodity shall preliminarily approve and announce the trademark that has applied for the prior application; the same day, the application shall be preliminarily approved and announced for the use of the prior trademark, and the application of the other person shall be rejected. No announcement will be made.

"The law stipulates that domestic trademark is granted the trademark right according to the principle of application first, unless it is a trademark with certain influence. Otherwise, the registered applicant is generally entitled to trademark right.

In addition, brand integrity, standardization of usage and monitoring of self sustained brands in trademark registration should be comprehensively controlled. On the solution of brand trademark problem, we have collected some applicable maintenance suggestions from the related platform of intellectual property construction (Note: Jun Ji intellectual property service platform).

　　 (1) the time for full registration of trademark application categories should also be as early as possible.

Comprehensive protection of core brand of core products. For important brands, all types of applications can be applied. The core brands should also apply for corresponding defensive trademarks, so that they not only protect their trademarks, but also effectively prevent others from climbing goodwill.

　　 2. After the successful registration of the trademark, it shall be used in accordance with the registered pattern.

In the process of changing trademark design, it should apply for trademark in a timely manner, and pay attention to accumulate trademark data and use evidence in the process of use, including product sales volume, sales area scope, market influence, advertising expenses, contracts, invoices and other data and data, so as to facilitate the assessment of the value of trademarks. Important significance.

　　 Regular trademark monitoring

In view of the infringement of others, effective measures should be taken to conduct trademark monitoring regularly. It is found that similar trademark applications should always pay attention to the application process and trademark status of the trademark. If necessary, a trademark objection may be filed against the trademark infringement. If the objection period is missed, an application for invalidation may be filed with the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board after the registration of the infringing trademark. After the trademark registration has been registered for three years, the trademark shall withdraw the three application to protect its legal rights.

　　 4. Timely use of legal means.

In line with the infringement in online stores or physical stores and promotional activities, it is possible to initiate actions against the infringement of trademark rights and unfair competition, so as to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of enterprises.