Ideal car to the "ideal film shop" claim 1.2 million shopkeeper: my small name ideal | unfair competition dispute

According to Red Star News reported on the 24th, Linyi, Shandong, engaged in car film business "Linyi new ideal Automobile Service Co., LTD.", recently was ideal automobile on the grounds of "infringement of trademark rights and unfair competition disputes", sued for a total of 1.2 million yuan, causing the whole network hot debate.


The film shop sued by Ideal Automobile (Source: Red Star News)

Many netizens believe that,The word "ideal" belongs to the general word, why the "ideal car" registered, others can not use, can not others have the ideal? And feel that the "ideal car" claim amount is too high, there is no pattern, there is a suspicion of big deception small. Some netizens also ran to the "ideal car" broadcast room and the "ideal car" official account message, such as, I was originally ideal, this can not have, afraid of being claimed, in order to ridicule the ideal car rights protection

Ideal car sues "Ideal film shop"


He asked her to change her name, apologize and claim 1.2 million yuan

The operating body of Ideal Car is Beijing Chehejia Information Technology Co., LTD., which was officially established in July 2015, is committed to creating a new intelligent electric vehicle and changing the traditional travel experience of users.In June 2019, Che Hejia unified the company brand name Ideal car.

According to the complaint filed by Beijing Chehejia Information Technology Co., LTD.,Request the court to:


The defendant was ordered to immediately stop infringing the plaintiff's exclusive right to use the "Ideal" registered trademark, including but not limited to immediately stop using the same or similar logo with the said registered trademark on the store door, in-store decoration and social platforms;


The defendant was ordered to immediately stop the act of unfair competition, change the name of the enterprise, and the changed name of the enterprise must not contain "ideal" words;


The defendant was ordered to publish a statement (the content of which must be agreed by the plaintiff) in China Intellectual Property News and Qilu Evening News for 30 consecutive days in order to eliminate the adverse effects of trademark infringement and unfair competition on the plaintiff;


The defendant was ordered to compensate the plaintiff for the economic losses caused by trademark infringement and unfair competition of RMB 1 million; The defendant was ordered to compensate the plaintiff for reasonable expenses incurred to stop the infringement, tentatively amounting to 200,000 yuan;The defendant was ordered to bear the costs of the case.


Civil complaint picture source: Orange Persimmon Interactive

According to Red Star News, Zhu Yuhao, the shop's owner,He said his nickname is called "ideal", and the car film shop from 2012 when it was just established called "ideal car decoration", now called "ideal car film factory", has been used is "ideal",Our family is making film, I really do not understand how to cause him more than 1 million losses?"


Enterprise check information shows that on February 25, 2022, the store was registered as Linyi Ideal Automobile Service Co., LTD., and the company name was changed to Linyi New Ideal Automobile Service Co., LTD. In March of that year.


It is worth noting that Linyi New Ideal Automobile Service Co., Ltd. is not the only company whose name contains the word "ideal". The reporter searched for the ideal car on the enterprise check, and there were a number of company names established before 2015 that contained the word "ideal", such as Ningbo Ideal Auto Parts Co., LTD., established in 2001, Hefei Ideal Auto Trading Co., LTD., established in 1998.

Ideal car: the shop "posing as the official ideal car"


Conduct business

On the evening of July 24, the ideal car issued a note in the official account, sayingIt will not affect the reasonable and reasonable use of the word "ideal" in life.


Ideal car statement

The ideal car description reads:

First, we are not suing each other for ordinary "trademark infringement", the use of the word "ideal" is very widespread in daily life, we respect the reasonable use of all sectors of society, and we have no intention to take legal action.


Second, the reason for our prosecution is that the store "pretended to be an ideal car official" for sales, group buying and other commercial activities, and was reported by local owners.For such "pretending to be an ideal car official" to cause consumer confusion, we will insist on taking legal means to protect our rights.


Ideal Automobile said that the case is currently under trial, and the relevant evidence has been fully submitted to the court. We believe that the court will make a fair judgment in accordance with the law on the basis of finding out the facts.

Lawyer: The lawsuit is reasonable and legal


1.2 million compensation is not "wild speculations"

Does the use of the word "ideal" in the company name constitute infringement?

In this regard, Ding Baifang, a lawyer from Taihe Tai Law Firm, told the Daily Economic News that in general,Prior use does not constitute infringement,In this case, before the date of application for the registered trademark of "Ideal Automobile" brand, Mr. Zhu has continuously used the same or similar trademark with the registered trademark on the same or similar goods or services,After a registered trademark is authorized, the right to use the trademark on the original goods or services can continue.

But according to Ideal Car's response,In this case, the "ideal film shop" has commercial activities such as "posing as the official ideal car" for sales and group buying.According to Article 58 of Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China,Where the use of another person's registered trademark or unregistered well-known trademark as a shop name in an enterprise name misleads the public and constitutes an act of unfair competition, it shall be dealt with in accordance with the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China.

Under Article 6 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law,Business operators shall not carry out the following acts of confusion, causing people to be mistaken for other people's goods or have a specific connection with others:((1) Unauthorized use of the name of the commodity, packaging, decoration and other similar or similar logo that has a certain influence on others; (2) Unauthorized use of enterprise names (including abbreviations, shop names, etc.), social organization names (including abbreviations, etc.), names (including pen names, stage names, translated names, etc.) that have certain influence on others; (3) Unauthorized use of the main part of the domain name, the name of the website, the webpage, etc., which has certain influence on others; (4) other acts of confusion that are sufficient to cause people to be mistaken for the goods of others or have specific connections with others.

Article 17 provides that,A business operator who violates the provisions of this Law and causes damage to others shall bear civil liability according to law. A business operator whose lawful rights and interests have been harmed by an act of unfair competition may bring a suit in a people's court.

Therefore, it is reasonable and legal for Ideal Automobile to file a civil lawsuit against "Ideal film Shop" for trademark infringement and unfair competition disputes.

For the 1.2 million compensation standard widely questioned by netizens, lawyer Ding said that Article 17 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law stipulates that,The amount of compensation for a business operator injured by an act of unfair competition shall be determined on the basis of the actual losses suffered by the business operator as a result of the infringement; If the actual loss is difficult to calculate, it shall be determined according to the benefits the infringer has gained from the infringement.Where a business operator maliciously infringes on trade secrets and the circumstances are serious, the amount of compensation may be determined at not less than one time but not more than five times the amount determined in accordance with the above-mentioned methods.The amount of compensation shall also include reasonable expenses paid by the business operator to stop the infringing act.

Where a business operator violates the provisions of Article 6 and Article 9 of this Law, and it is difficult to determine the actual losses suffered by the right holder as a result of the infringement, or the benefits gained by the infringer as a result of the infringement, the people's court shall, according to the circumstances of the infringement, award the right holder compensation of not more than five million yuan.


Therefore, the ideal car advocates a huge compensation of 1.2 million yuan, which does not belong to "wild speculations" and has a legal basis.


Media: The law is the law


Emotion can't replace law after all

In the eyes of netizens, ideal car, as a well-known car company with a market value of more than 100 billion, why do you want to go against a small film shop with a registered capital of only 100,000 yuan? Not only did they "change their name" and claim 1.2 million yuan in economic losses, but they also asked them to apologize for 30 days in the local media, which is suspected of bullying. Some netizens also ran to the "ideal car" broadcast room and the "ideal car" official account message, such as, I was originally ideal, this can not have, afraid of being claimed, in order to ridicule the ideal car rights protection.


In response, Rednet commented that obviously,Netizens' judgment on the case of "ideal car" suing "ideal film shop" is mostly from the perspective of personal emotion, and they unilaterally believe that "ideal car" shop is a big liar, without the pattern and cultivation that big enterprises should have, carrying out moral kidnapping and moral trial.

In fact, "ideal car" against "ideal film shop", after all, is a case involving intellectual property rights,We should take facts as the basis, take law as the rope, and use jurisprudence to stop disputes.

The case of "ideal car" suing "Ideal film shop" has caused huge controversy, undoubtedly telling everyone that if you can't focus on facts and law,Treating this intellectual property case too emotionally may deviate from the track of the law.

Anyhow,After all, legal matters must be thought and evaluated from a legal perspective, and emotions cannot replace laws after all.People have reason to believe that the judiciary will take the law as the sole standard and yardstick in this case and make a fair and just final judgment. Source: National Business Daily

More intellectual property information and services


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


More deeply trusted dynamic news, authorization cases, important cases/data/reports in the intellectual industry, etc


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


Related Cases

Shenzhen court publishes 10 typical cases on judicial protection of intellectual property in digital economy in 2022

Case 1: Ma Muhua and other eight people committed the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks Case 2: Shenzhen Zushu Technology Co., Ltd. v. Shenzhen You Film Media Co., Ltd. and other network unfair competition dispute Case 3: Shenzhen Tencent Computer System Co., Ltd. v. Shenzhen Questor Network Technology Co., Ltd. infringement of copyright and unfair competition dispute case 4: Shenzhen Zhisuo Information Technology Co., Ltd. v. Speed Snail (Shenzhen) Intelligence Co., Ltd. infringement of trade secrets Dispute Case 5: Shenzhen Jingying Light Technology Co., Ltd. and Chen Mou infringement of trade secrets dispute case six: Beijing Legal Information Technology Co., Ltd. v. Shenzhen Red Stone Decoration Engineering Co., Ltd. infringement of works information network communication right dispute case



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



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."



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.



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.



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.



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


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


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