In the age of "fairy fights" at the food market
The famous name is a magic weapon for diners to "avoid lightning"
But intellectual-property disputes are also brewing
Expiration of contract
Franchisee is reluctant to "golden sign"
As in Yueyang business for many years
The Dingsanmao barbecue, which is quite famous here
This is the "trouble"
Yueyang Intermediate Court held a public trial
Such a dispute over trademark infringement
Basic case
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.
In August 2017, after the expiration of the contract license, the barbecue franchise chain did not renew the franchise agreement with Dingsanmao Diet Company, but continued to use the trademark logo and corporate culture of Dingsanmao Diet Company. Dingsanmao food company filed a lawsuit to the Yueyang Intermediate Court on the grounds that the barbecue franchise chain violated trademark rights.
Judge's decision
After hearing the case, the court held that there were two issues in this case:
01 Whether the continued use of the trademark by the barbecue franchise chain after the expiration of the renewal constitutes infringement
Trademark Act Article 57 Any of the following acts constitutes an infringement of the right to exclusive use of a registered trademark: (1) using a trademark identical to its registered trademark on the same kind of goods without the permission of the trademark registrant. The plaintiff has registered the trademark of the store, and the trademark is within the validity period, so the exclusive right to use the registered trademark enjoyed by the plaintiff shall be protected by law. In this case, the renewal agreement signed by the two parties is legal and valid, in line with the valid requirements stipulated by law, and all parties perform the rights and obligations of the contract in accordance with the contract. In August 2017, after the termination of the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, because the two parties did not continue to sign the franchise agreement, the defendant continued to use the plaintiff's registered trademark and operate the same catering business as the plaintiff in the store door and store without obtaining the plaintiff's permission, which was easy to misidentify the relevant public, and the defendant's behavior violated the plaintiff's exclusive right to use the registered trademark. Shall bear the civil liability to stop the infringement and compensate for the loss.
02 If infringement is constituted, how to bear civil liability
The plaintiff has the right to authorize the franchisee whether to continue to use the right to use the registered trademark after the expiration of the contract, and decide the authorization period, negotiate the renewal of the franchise fee and other related matters. According to the agreement on renewal signed by the original and the defendant, that is, after the termination of the license, the defendant shall not continue to use any license, signboard, advertisement, articles, clothing, decoration, decoration, corporate culture, etc., involving the exclusive right of the plaintiff, otherwise the plaintiff has the right to ask the defendant to stop the infringement and compensate for the loss of 100,000 yuan. The agreement is signed by both parties. It is an agreement reached by both parties, and the court recognizes the validity of the agreement. According to the above agreement, the court supported the plaintiff's request for the defendant to bear 100,000 yuan. In addition, considering the legal fees and other rights protection expenses that the plaintiff must spend to protect his legal rights, it is determined to be 5,000 yuan.
In summary, according to the relevant laws and regulations, the Yueyang Intermediate Court ruled that the defendant immediately stopped using the plaintiff's exclusive right to use the registered trademark, and compensated for losses of 105,000 yuan.
After the judgment took effect, the original and the defendant reached a settlement on their own, and the plaintiff and the defendant renewed the franchise agreement.
Xiaobian is here to remind you businesses
The way of doing business
Integrity first
We must not harm the legitimate rights and interests of others for our own interests
Source: Yueyang Intermediate People's Court
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
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
Recently, it was learned from the network that an Internet company that opened a flagship store of "West Lake Building Building" on Tmall was fined 780,000 yuan by the Zhejiang Provincial Market Supervision Bureau for selling goods that violated the exclusive right to use the registered trademark of "Building outside Building".
2022-08-02
Recently, the United States Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a ruling that only the use of others' trademarks as bidding keywords does not constitute trademark infringement. The plaintiff, 1-800 Contacts, is an online contact lens retailer whose website is 1800contacts.com and is the owner of trademarks such as "1800 Contacts" and "1800contacts.com." Defendant JAND, Inc., which operates under the name "Warby Parker," is an online and physical eyewear retailer that recently entered the online contact lens market, selling contact lenses through warbyparker.com and in stores.
2022-07-29
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
