Nine animal King and nine animal husbandry: "idle fish" purchase "Pinjoduo" on the sale, the sale of "nine animal King" toilet was prosecuted, constituting trademark infringement and unfair competition

introduction
Many people online shopping, a look at the brand, the second look at sales. Therefore, in order to attract customers, some merchants not only rely on famous brands, but also exaggerate sales. Recently, the Tianxin District People's Court notified a case of trademark infringement and unfair competition, a company in Changsha opened a "certain high-end bathroom store" selling "nine animal King" toilets, in order to attract customers, sales of only a few hundred but exaggerated to have sold 50,000 pieces. Jiumu Company then sued a Changsha company on the grounds of trademark infringement and unfair competition, and the court recently made a judgment.
 
 
 
Nine animal King is a well-known brand in the clothing industry, but have you ever seen the "Nine animal King" toilet? Changsha a company in the "Pin-more" platform opened a "certain high-end bathroom shop" sales "nine animal king" toilet, one of the commodity sales link shows "has been fighting 50,000 pieces", another link shows "has been fighting 5017 pieces".
 
The plaintiff Jiumu Kitchen & Bath Co., Ltd. is the owner of the "Jiumu" series of registered trademarks, and the approved use categories of these trademarks all include "toilet bowl". After years of publicity, promotion and use, it has a high reputation.
 
Jiumu Company then on the grounds that a company in Changsha constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition. To the Tianxin District People's Court, asking it to compensate for economic losses and reasonable rights protection expenses of hundreds of thousands of yuan. The reason is that the "Nine animal King" logo in the toilet sold by the defendant is similar to the plaintiff's registered trademark "nine animal", which constitutes trademark infringement; The defendant fabricated the trading volume on the Pinduoduo platform, constituting unfair competition with false publicity.
 
A company in Changsha said in the defense that they are only sellers, their sales of the accused infringement of goods have legal sources, are purchased from the "leisure fish" platform, the "leisure fish" platform purchase records show that the title of their orders there are "nine animals" and "nine animals King" logo. In addition, the number of transactions in its Pinduoduo stores is actually only hundreds of pieces, of which more than 50,000 are obtained by brushing orders, and some of the actual transactions are refunded and replaced. Therefore, they contend that the logo used on the goods they sell does not resemble the Plaintiff's trademark, does not constitute trademark infringement, and does not constitute unfair competition.

The court ruled that it constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition

After hearing, the court held that the accused infringing trademark "Jiumu Wang" completely contains the word "Jiumu", which plays a core identification role in the series of registered trademarks of Jiumu Company, and is similar to its composition, which is easy to make the general public misrecognize the source of its goods, and infringes the plaintiff's exclusive right to use the registered trademark, so it constitutes trademark infringement. In addition, both the original and the defendant sold toilets, and the business scope overlaps and has a competitive relationship. A company in Changsha brushes orders when selling its products online, and the false publicity behavior of falsely increasing the number of transactions has constituted unfair competition.

 

Therefore, the Tianxin District People's Court made a judgment of first instance: the defendant shall compensate the plaintiff Jiumu Company for economic losses and reasonable expenses for rights protection within ten days from the date of the effective of the judgment, totaling 70,000 yuan. After the judgment of the first instance, the parties refused to accept the judgment and appealed to the Changsha Intermediate People's Court, which upheld the second instance and rejected the appeal.

 

Source: Trademark Case

More intellectual property information and services

 

The official subscription number of "Deep Trusted Intellectual Property Rights" on the code

官方订阅号.jpg

More deeply trusted authorization cases, dynamic news, important data/reports

 

Code on the concern [deep trusted intellectual property service platform] official service number

官方服务号.jpeg

Related Cases

What did the authorized dealer do when he became a trademark infringement offender?

The defendant Wang Mou, without the permission of the right holder, commissioned a Shanghai biotechnology Co., Ltd. to produce an eye cream printed with the registered trademark freezeframe. In March and July 2019, the two sides signed two procurement contracts. Defendant Wang instructed a Shanghai biotechnology Co., Ltd. to produce a total of more than 150,000 fake freezeframe brand eye cream, with a total price of more than 3.45 million yuan. After the completion of production, Wang, as the general distributor, sold some of the eye cream involved to domestic distributors and then sold it to consumers. Later, some consumers reflected that the eye cream was counterfeit goods, so the case. After the incident, the public security organs to seize the eye cream to identify, are counterfeit goods. The defendant Wang Mou was arrested by the public security organs, denied the above criminal facts.

2023-03-24

Detail

Ten typical cases of the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court in 2022 to serve and safeguard scientific and technological innovation

1, satellite navigation chip invention patent infringement case 2, "artificial bone" technology investment patent rights case 3, gene fingerprint detection of new varieties of plants 4, "tower granulation production particle compound fertilizer" invention patent infringement case 5, divided case application patent temporary protection fee case 6, involving criminal and civil cross technical secrets infringement case 7, Innovation "double cycle, multiple rounds" identification computer software infringement case 8, "You Manager" wechat marketing software unfair competition case 9, "Takeup switching device" service invention patent application right case 10, German enterprise "modified polyisocyanate" invention patent infringement case

2023-03-01

Detail

Guangdong High Court issued six typical cases of intellectual property crimes

Typical criminal cases of intellectual property rights in Guangdong courts 1, Yan and others counterfeiting registered trademarks - punishing the trademark crime of "second-hand refurbished" electrical appliances disguised as "original genuine products" 2, Yang Moumou, Wang Mou copyright infringement case - Combating the crime of online film and television works piracy 3, PI Moumou trade secret infringement case - Punishing the crime of former employees violating the technical secrets of the original enterprise Four, Dong Mou and others counterfeit registered trademark case - severely punish the crime of manufacturing and selling counterfeit registered trademark masks Five, Wang Mou's sale of counterfeit registered trademark case - Combat electric bullet window new form of trademark crime Six, Gao Mou repeatedly sold counterfeit registered trademark case - punish the trademark crime of live broadcasting with goods to know fake sales

2023-01-04

Detail

Shenzhen Municipal Regulatory Bureau issued a typical case of "brushing single speculation" unfair competition

Galima Company claims that the product accused of infringement adopts the design of the appearance patent No. ZL202030343224.9, and its behavior does not constitute infringement. In this regard, the Court of second instance held that Article 23 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Patent Infringement Disputes (II) provides that: "Where the alleged infringing technical scheme or design falls within the scope of protection of the prior patent right involved, and the accused infringer argues that his technical scheme or design has been granted a patent right to not infringe the patent right involved, the people's court shall not support it."

2022-12-16

Detail

Compensation more than 10 million yuan! Judgment on trademark infringement and unfair competition of "Jager"

Recently, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court concluded a case concerning "Jager" trademark infringement and unfair competition. After trial, the court ordered the three defendants, Shenglola (Qingdao) Wine Co., LTD. (referred to as Shenglola Company), Hefei Puyuan Trading Co., LTD. (referred to as Puyuan Company), and Sing Mou to immediately stop trademark infringement and unfair competition, and publish a statement to eliminate the impact. And compensate the plaintiff Master Zagamist European Company (referred to as Master Company) economic losses, punitive damages, reasonable expenses of more than 10 million yuan.

2022-12-16

Detail

NetEase v. "Mini World" infringement case final judgment, mini play compensation NetEase 50 million yuan

Recently, according to the Guangdong Provincial High People's Court news, the game "My World" agency, v. the game "Mini World" development company, infringement of its copyright and unfair competition case final judgment. The court found that "Mini World" development company "Shenzhen Mini Play" constituted unfair competition, ordered it to delete 230 infringing elements in the game, and compensate "Minecraft" agency "NetEase" 50 million yuan.

2022-12-07

Detail

The use of "Beijing Erguotou" was convicted of infringement

The story starts with two enterprises Beijing Red Star Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Red Star Company) Xianghe Jingyun Distillery (hereinafter referred to as Jingyun Distillery) In 2018, Red Star found that the packaging of wine products produced by Jingyun Distillery and Red Star Company's No. 4600693 three-dimensional graphic trademark, whether from the overall composition or local information to compare, Both constitute substantial similarity and are suspected to constitute trademark infringement.

2022-12-05

Detail

Judgment of 2 million yuan! "Tart Lime" v. "Da Lime" trademark infringement and unfair competition judgment

Guangzhou Weimanduo Catering Enterprise Management Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Weimanduo Company) registered a number of trademarks ""," ", ""," and ". As of May 2018, Weimando has opened more than 50 "Tart Lime" hand tart lemon tea drink stores in Guangzhou, and the tea product packaging and decoration with "" pattern have been used and promoted for a long time, and have gained certain popularity. The trademark registered or authorized to be used by Guangzhou Shangyi Brand Operation Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Shangyi Company) is "" "", but the company uses "" "" logo in its model store and official website promotion, and authorized Guangzhou Dele Catering Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Dele Company) on shop signs and beverage packaging.

2022-11-28

Detail
5fa71b43-ff57-4550-a010-a0bec2f75bb4.png

Head Office13 / F, Building 14, Longhua Science and Technology Innovation Center (Mission Hills), No. 8 Golf Avenue, Guanlan Street, Longhua District, Shenzhen

Head Office

13 / F, Building 14, Longhua Science and Technology Innovation Center (Mission Hills), No. 8 Golf Avenue, Guanlan Street, Longhua District, Shenzhen

5fa71b43-ff57-4550-a010-a0bec2f75bb4.png

Subsidiary Company2808, Block B2, Yuexiu Xinghui Junbo, No.18 Tazihu East Road, Jiangan District, Wuhan City, Hubei Province

Subsidiary Company

2808, Block B2, Yuexiu Xinghui Junbo, No.18 Tazihu East Road, Jiangan District, Wuhan City, Hubei Province

图片名称

Service Number

订阅号.jpg

Subscription Number


Copyright ©2016 Shenzhen Shenkexin patent Agency Co., LTD All rights reserved | 粤ICP备2021174526号

Copyright ©2016 深圳市深可信专利代理有限公司 版权所有 | 粤ICP备2021174526号 SEO标签

Copyright ©2016 深圳市深可信专利代理有限公司 版权所有

粤ICP备2021174526号