Henan Business Daily Chief Reporter Sunke / Map
“Babu” VS “Babu”, enterprise “famous brand”, will the court will judge? Release falsehood on the Internet, “Black” competitors, is it right?
On the occasion of the “4 · 26” World Intellectual Property Day, on April 22, the Zhengzhou Intermediate People’s Court held a press conference to report the 2020 annual intellectual property trial work and announced a typical case.
Three years, Zhengzhou City Court accepted a total of 12,000 cases of knowledge
On March 2, 2018, Zhengzhou Intellectual Property Tribunal was established. Henan Business Daily reporter learned that in the past three years, Zhengzhou City Court received 12,693 cases of knowledge, 12669 cases.
What is the characteristics of these cases?
Zhao Jianliang, a comprehensive trial of the intellectual property of Zhengzhou Intermediate People’s Court, said that these cases involve a wide range of industry sectors, and the authority of the parties claim to protect the toys, clothes, food, medicine, communications, machinery, agriculture and other matters related to the masses of food and clothing. field of.
In addition, the subject matter of the case and the social impact have also increased year by year. Zhao Jianliang said that the case of the first instance of the right to invest more than 1 million yuan in 2018. There are 67 in 2019. There are 90 years in 2020.
A, “Babu” VS “Babu Dog”, “名”, was sentenced to 5 million yuan
At the press conference, Zhao Jianliang also announced a number of typical cases.
The plaintiff, a childwear product company (hereinafter referred to as a child supplies company) is a company produced and sells children’s shoes. After years of continuous propaganda, the company has been able to have a certain visibility, and 2003 to 2012 was rated as “Shanghai Famous Trademark” in a consecutive year.
The associated company of the defendant Fujian Jinjiang Safety Service Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Jinjiang, a footwear company) has obtained the authorization of some trademark rights involved in the case. After the end of the authorization, the Jinjiang somewhere and its other related company a city Babei Children’s Products Co., Ltd. (a city Babei Company) has registered a large number of registrations including “babudog”, “Babu” and other elements. The trademark is used, and the above-mentioned trademark is identified by the use of ineffective means to rush the trademark.
From June 19, 2019, the plaintiff bought a lawsuit suspected of infringement in various regions of Zhengzhou City, filed a lawsuit against Zhengzhou Zhongyuan, requested to order the defendant Jinjiang ambassador company and a city Babei company. Production, sales behavior; stop using “a city Babei company” enterprise name, compensation economic loss 10 million yuan.
After the Zhengzhou Intermediate People’s Court heard, the defendant of a city Babei company, Jinjiang ambassador company, constituteed a trademark infringement and improper competition. Decree a city Babei company, Jinjiang ambassador company compensation for economic losses of 5 million yuan, and stop using the “Babu Beap” in the enterprise name and stop using the domain name on the corporate website.
After the pronunciation, a city Babei company filed an appeal. The Henan Senior People’s Court has been tried to maintain a judgment.
This case is a typical “rush trademark”, “名” case. According to the law, the registered trademark obtained by improper means is invalid, and the dedicated power of the registered trademark is deemed to have from start.
In this case, the trademark of a footwear company in Jinjiang, a city, a trademark registered by a city, a behavior that was quoted by the improper means, and the trademark was invalidated, and its own right to be trademark dedicated, The use of the trademark was invalidated before the trademark, which also violated the trademark rights of a child supplies involved in the registered trademark, constituing infringement, and should be responsible for compensation.
B, release false news on the Internet, “black” competitors, they “plant”
Heilongjiang Province A Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Heilongjiang Agricultural Company) and Gaizhou Co.
In 2020, a agricultural company in Heilongjiang found that a company in Gaizhou City released a name “revealing a agricultural scam! Sad, see who is around you?”, This article listed in Heilongjiang The “Ten Sin” of the agricultural company, subsequently, a agricultural company in Heilongjiang is destroyed by a company in Gaizhou, a false propaganda act violates the anti-unfounded competition law, and the court is resorted to the court.
Zhengzhou Zhongyuan First Instance Decree determined that the article released by a company in Gaizhou has damaged the reputation and commodity reputation of a agricultural company in Heilongjiang, and its behavior has constituted unfair competition. The judgment of a company in Gaizhou City ceased to create, disseminated the behavior of the false information of the commercial reputation and commodity reputation of Heilongjiang, and compensated that a agricultural company in Heilongjiang lost 50,000 yuan, and published a claim in Henan Provincial Provincial Provincial Newspaper. Affected statement.
After the pronunciation, a company in Gaoshou filed an appeal, and the Henan Senior People’s Court was tried to maintain a judgment.
The benign competition in the enterprise helps to promote economic development and prosper market. In order to improve their competitiveness, the business reputation, maliciously destroyed competitors, and conduct false propaganda, not only destroyed a good business environment, but also undertakes the corresponding civil liability.
The people’s court give full play to the judicial function, correct bad competition behaviors, and guide enterprises to carry out benign competition, actively play in maintaining good business environments, so that more companies are booming in a good business environment, promoting rapid economic development in my country. .
(Editor: Liu Meng Dang Lu Rui)