Ocean.com also saw “Li Gui”, the difference between the word was hard to play the brand, playing “wipe the ball” misleading consumers, violating the law? How to compensate?

The reporter learned yesterday that the Liwan Court of Guangzhou has tried a famous brand case. A tea company uses the old -fashioned keywords to sell a variety of products online, and the defendant will claim on the court.

Under the same word to the old -fashioned word, it is sued in unfair competition

Jiangmen Xinhui District Xinbatthaya Chenpi Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Xinbaotang Company”) was established in July 2008. The business scope is the acquisition, sales (including online sales), initial processing Chenpi, etc. Church “” Lingnan Xinbaotang “and other trademarks.

In 2021, Xinbaotang found that a tea company in Guangzhou sold Chenpi products on a store opened on a website, and marked the relevant “Xinhui Factory’s 5 years of Xinhui Chenpi Tianma Tianma Guangdong Special Products Original Origin for the Wholesale Delivery” Words.

Xin Baotang believes that the tea industry company has used the keywords of its registered trademarks to sell multiple products without its authorization, and the confusion of attracting the general attention of the public with the name of the new Baotang company’s company has been unauthorized. The formation of subjective and maliciousness, which is mistaken for a specific connection with the Xinbaotang Company, shall bear the liability of infringement and liability for compensation.

Xinbattang Company sued the court on the grounds that the tea company constituted inappropriate competition, asking him to apologize, compensate economic losses, and reasonable costs incurred for rights protection.

The court’s claim loss of 50,000 yuan

In the first instance of the People’s Court of Liwan District, Guangzhou, a tea company in Guangzhou compensated the new Baotang Company’s economic loss and reasonable cost of rights protection of 50,000 yuan. At present, the judgment has taken effect.

The court pointed out that according to Article 6 of the “Anti -Unfair Competition Law”, the operator shall not implement the confusion of the company name (including abbreviation, font size, etc.) that has a certain impact of others without authorization. There is a specific connection between others.

In this case, the Chenpi products displayed and sold by a tea industry in Guangzhou in its online store are the same type of product as the Chenpi products produced and sold by Xinbaotang Company. His behavior and the production and sales behavior of Xinbaotang Company constitute market competition in the market competition. relation.

It was found that Xinbaotang Company has won a number of honors, and many newspapers and magazines have also published reports on Xinbaotang Chenpi. After years of continuous operation and use, the “Xinbaotang” name has a certain impact in the Chenpi industry.

The name of the product name of the product of the infringing Chenpi products uses the word “Baotang source origin and wholesale delivery”. The word “Baotang” is similar to the plaintiff “Xinbaotang”. It is mistaken for the unfair competition behavior that belongs to the company’s corporate name damage to competitors without authorization.

Based on the nature of the infringement behavior and plot of a tea company in Guangzhou, the types and value of the product involved in the case, the court determined that the tea company in Guangzhou should compensate the new Baotang company’s economic loss and reasonable cost of rights protection for a total of 50,000 yuan.

Judge said: Playing the “Wipe Border” and “Bian Mingda” violate the principles of honesty and faith and fair competition

According to Zuo Si, an official of the Liwan District People’s Court of Guangzhou, with the rapid development of the socioeconomic and economy, the competition of market business entities is becoming more and more intense, and more and more enterprises have promoted and sold their products and services with the help of the Internet channels. In this context, in order to increase the sales of their own products, some companies often seek some illegal ways. In the title of the product name of their products, the same or similar words are the same or similar as some well -known enterprises. When the font size, it will be linked to its products, which makes the relevant public confuse the source of the product, and mistakenly believe that the product has a specific connection with the products of some well -known enterprises.

Judge Zusi reminded that the main body of market operations should pay attention to strengthening the protection of its own intellectual property rights, continuously build and improve its own intellectual property protection mechanism, and regularly retrieve relevant font size, trademark, copyright, etc. on the Internet, and timely discover illegal use or infringement The situation of its intellectual property rights and promptly protect relevant evidence for rights protection. In addition, you can also check the relevant trademark information on a regular basis to see if there are similar trademark applications such as its font size and trademarks, and timely discover and raise objections in accordance with the law to effectively and effectively maintain their own intellectual property rights.

At the same time, the operator uses the company name that has a certain impact on the online platform sales link and the title of the product name, which can easily confuse and misunderstand the relevant public. The principles of illegal faith and fair competition are unfair competitive behaviors that are damaging competitors. They should be regulated by improper competition law and shall bear corresponding legal responsibilities.

“新宝堂”陈皮去“新”变“宝堂”,商家被判赔5万元

It is also reminded that the majority of the operators can operate in integrity and compete fairly in order to continue to develop for a long time.

Wen, Tu/Guangzhou Daily · Xinhua City Reporter: Articles of Association Correspondent: Li Court

[Edit: Xiang Xiang’e]