After the sauerkraut incident fermented, Master Kang apologized and said that he confirmed that the flag vegetable industry was a supplier and had canceled all cooperation with it.
On the evening of March 15, Master Kong issued a statement on the supplier of "soil pit Sauerkraut", pointing out that Hunan Puqi Vegetable Industry Co., Ltd. is one of the suppliers of Master Kong Sauerkraut, and the company has immediately suspended its supplier qualification, cancelled all cooperation, sealed its sauerkraut bag products, and actively cooperated with the regulatory authorities to investigate and test.
At this point, many e-commerce platforms have been unable to search the Laotan sauerkraut products.
In addition to the "soil pit sauerkraut" incident, Master Kang has also been involved in trademark infringement cases.
Once Master Kang was "Kang Shuaifu" played around, and now "Master Kang" is often due to "trademark infringement", "unfair competition" into everyone's vision.
The Haidian Court made a judgment of first instance on the dispute over trademark infringement and unfair competition between the plaintiff Dingyi Company and the defendant Zhengzhou Master Kang Company and Soufighter Company.
Zhengzhou Master Kong Company changed its business name and issued a statement to eliminate the impact, compensating Dingyi company for economic losses and reasonable expenses of 350,000 yuan.
At that time, the Dingyi company said in the appeal that it enjoyed the exclusive right to use the registered trademark of "Master Kong" on Class 30 and Class 32 goods. The Zhengzhou Master Kong Company used the "KSF, ZZKSF" logo on the bottled water produced and sold, and highlighted the words "Master Kong" on the network platform for promotion, which violated the trademark rights of Dingyi Company.
At the same time, it also claimed that the Zhengzhou Master Kong Company registered "Master Kong" as an enterprise name and used it, which also constituted "unfair competition". Not only that, Zhengzhou Master Kong Company also introduced on its official website "belongs to Master Kong International Trading Group Co., LTD.", "from the underground more than 700 meters of ultra-deep well quality mineral water" and other content. This is inconsistent with the facts, belongs to false propaganda, and also constitutes unfair competition.
As a third-party network publicity platform, Soo Fighter company constitutes a help infringement, and Soo Fighter Company highlights the use of "Master Kong" in the recommended pictures and text on the page, which infringes the trademark rights of Dingyi Company.
Therefore, the court was requested to order the Zhengzhou Master Kang Company to stop the infringement of trademark rights and unfair competition, change the enterprise name, and the two defendants jointly compensated the Dingyi company for economic losses of 500,000 yuan and reasonable expenses of 166,000 yuan, and published a statement to eliminate the impact.
Zhengzhou Master Kong Company argued that its documented evidence is not enough to prove the existence of infringement, and has its own trademark, the use of the logo in line with the relevant provisions of the trademark law and food safety law, its corporate name is legally registered by the relevant departments, there is no infringement of trademark rights. The search fighter company argues that it is only a provider of information network services and does not infringe.
The court accepted and heard the case and held that: Dingyi Company has the right to exclusive use of registered trademarks involved in the case and should be protected according to law. The bottled water provided by Zhengzhou Master Kong Company constitutes the same kind of commodity as the "water" in Class 32 of the "Master Kong" trademark approved and used in No. 1321811, and is neither the same nor similar to the "instant noodles" "coffee and tea" in Class 30.
Secondly, the "KSF, ZZKSF" logo used by Zhengzhou Master Kong Company does not belong to the same or similar trademarks as the trademarks involved in the case, but considering the market popularity of the trademarks involved, Zhengzhou Master Kong Company uses the words "Master Kong"Easy to cause consumer confusion，Has violated the exclusive right to use registered trademarks enjoyed by Dingyi Company on the trademarks involved. As an information network service provider, the search fighter company does not infringe the trademark rights of Dingyi Company.
For unfair competition, the court held that the Zhengzhou Master Kong company registered and used the word "Master Kong" as an enterprise name, which could easily cause the public to misidentify the relationship with the "Master Kong" brand and constitute unfair competition. And in its propaganda, exaggerated propaganda that does not conform to the facts constitutes false propaganda and has constituted unfair competition, so the court made the above judgment!
In production and business activities, mislead consumers to believe that they provide other people's goods or have a specific connection with others through counterfeiting of other people's registered trademarks or logos, and borrow others' influence and popularity to improve their own and their products' market competitiveness. Such behavior not only damages the legitimate rights and interests of the right holder, but also deceives and misleads consumers and disrupts the market competition order.
Industry competition will promote economic activity, but in accordance with the law, the progress and development of enterprises, innovation. Only by changing the method and innovating continuously can we develop steadily.
Source: Comprehensive fine and soft intellectual property, Red Star News, The Paper news
More intellectual property information and services
Pay attention to [Shenkexin Intellectual Property] Official subscription number
More deeply credible dynamic news, important data/report/case, etc.
Pay attention to the [Shenkexin Intellectual Property Service Platform] official service number
Related Cases
The name of the case | The name is the same. Which is the "water password"?
The plaintiff was approved to obtain and "" registered trademarks on December 7, 2010 and October 28, 2012, respectively, and approved to use the commodities for (international classification category 3) cosmetics and other skin care and washing products, and the State Administration for Industry and Commerce Trademark Office review identified as well-known trademarks, by the Guangzhou Municipal People's Government included in the well-known trademark protection list.
2022-08-19
Lanzhou Foci Company, the plaintiff in the basic case, is a joint-stock company established by the former Shanghai Foci Pharmaceutical Co., LTD., which moved west to Lanzhou in 1956. It is a manufacturer of many well-known traditional Chinese medicine products and was named "China Time-honored Brand" by the Ministry of Commerce in December 2006. On April 21, 1996, the "Foci" trademark was registered and continues to be used by Foci.
2022-08-18
Dingsanmao Catering Service Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as "Dingsanmao Catering Company") was established in 2010, registered the store trademark, valid until 2030. In September 2011, Liu Mou took over a barbecue franchise chain of Dingsanmao Food company. In August 2014, Ding Sanmao food company and Liu mou renewed the barbecue franchise chain franchise agreement, the license period is three years, clearly agreed that "after the termination of the license barbecue franchise chain shall not continue to use any license involving the exclusive right to Ding Sanmao, signs, advertising, items, clothing, decoration, decoration, corporate culture, etc." Otherwise, the company has the right to ask the barbecue franchise chain to stop the infringement and compensate for the loss of 100,000 yuan." The agreement shall be signed and sealed by both parties and shall be legally effective in accordance with the effective conditions of the contract.
2022-08-17
Hundreds of toilet water enterprises were sued for trademark infringement due to the production of "honeysuckle" toilet water, and recently welcomed the turning point. In two related cases, the Intermediate People's Court of Zhongshan, Guangdong Province, revoked the original judgment, found that the defendant two Jiangxi companies did not constitute trademark infringement, and rejected the plaintiff Shanghai Bili Cosmetics Company's claims.
2022-08-15
KOHLER Company (KOHLER CO.) is the owner of the "Kohler" registered trademark, the approved use of goods including toilets, urinals (sanitation facilities), etc., the above trademarks within the validity period. A Guangdong law firm was authorized by Kohler to defend the infringement of Kohler's intellectual property rights in China. On March 22, 2021, A Guangdong law firm reported to the Jiangyin Market Supervision Bureau that there were counterfeit goods with the registered trademark of "KOHLER" in Company A.
2022-08-11
The trademark of domestic brand "defense war" | BRTV The General Interpretation of the Civil Code
Why China's Light is embroiled in trademark disputes? Are there any similarities between the two logos? Can common ground settle trademark disputes? Old domestic trademark disputes, how to establish a mechanism to protect from scratch? Beijing Radio and Television Science and Education Channel "Civil Code Interpretation and Reading" column specially invited Beijing Intellectual Property Court judge Ma Xingfang and senior media person Zhang Chunwei, for you to interpret the trademark "defense war" of domestic brands.
2022-08-10
The Shanghai Intellectual Property Court recently made a final judgment on the trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute between appellant Sichuan Tiandi Publishing House Co., Ltd. and appellant Shanghai Children's Publishing House Co., LTD. : The appeal was rejected and the original judgment was upheld. The court found that Tiandi Publishing House's use of "100,000 whys" in 14 book titles, book covers, sales pictures and descriptions constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition by using the unique names of well-known commodities without authorization, and the use of "100,000 Whys is a classic reading that affects generations of people... This book is an upgraded version of "100,000 why" and other expressions, which constitute unfair competition of false propaganda, and should bear civil liabilities such as stopping infringement, publishing a statement to eliminate the impact and compensate for losses.
2022-08-07
"Ji Mi" accused "Ji Mi Nut" trademark infringement On August 1, Ji Mi through the official platform, issued a "Ji Mi" trademark was "Ji Mi nut" malicious infringement incident "solemn statement. As a leader in the domestic projector industry, Ji Mi's statement immediately aroused the attention of netizens.
2022-08-07
Recently, in a case involving "Yihetang" trademark infringement and unfair competition disputes, the Guangzhou Intellectual Property Court applied the rules of evidence disclosure, and found that Yinuo company constituted an obstruction of proof when the defendant refused to submit relevant financial information. After referring to the litigation request and documentary evidence of the right holder Yihuiyin Company, it was determined that Ynuo Company had violated Yihuiyin Company's exclusive right to use the "Yihetang" registered trademark, and the compensation amount was increased from 300,000 yuan in the first instance to 1 million yuan, and Ynuo Company should bear all the litigation costs of the first and second instance.
2022-08-05
Recently, the Guangdong Provincial High People's Court made a final judgment on a trademark infringement dispute, Guangdong Yongquan Valve Technology Co., Ltd. was awarded 10 million yuan, and the infringing party was awarded maximum compensation for trademark infringement and unfair competition.
2022-08-03
Telephone：
Telephone：+86-755-82566227、82566717、13751089600
Head Office：13 / 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
Subsidiary Company：2808, 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
Service Number
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
