亚洲中文字幕日产无码2020,国产精品186在线观看在线播放,久久婷婷五月综合色99啪ak,国产精品麻豆aⅴ人妻

Unitalen Representing "DR. MARTENS" First Won Judicial Determination of a Famous Trademark, and "馬丁靴(Martin Boots)" Determined Not to Be a Common Name for Footwear and Boots Goods

August 28, 2024

Case Brief

The plaintiff, Airwair International Limited (hereinafter referred to as "Airwair" or "the plaintiff"), as the exclusive global authorized licensee of the "Dr. Martens" series of trademarks, including the No. 584207 international registered trademark, is responsible for the design, production, promotion, and sale of the series of products of the brand "Dr. Martens" in China. Since the 1960s, "Dr. Martens" footwear and boots products have been sold in more than 80 countries and regions worldwide, one of the most recognizable footwear trademark brands in the world. Since 2003, "DR. MARTENS" and its products have been advertised and reported by the Chinese newspapers and media. In 2007, the brand "Dr. Martens" entered the Chinese market, with its sales areas covering all over the country. The brand has enjoyed high popularity in China.

The defendant, Hu, the legal representative of a clothing company in Shantou, filed an application in July 2011 and obtained the approval in June 2012 for registration of the No. 9780715 "Dr. mannar" trademark for use on the same goods "clothing; footwear" as the authorized trademark. The defendant, the clothing company in Shantou, sold footwear and boots products on Tmall, Taobao, 1688 and other e-commerce platforms, and used the infringing marks such as "馬丁(Martin)", "馬丁靴(Martin Boots)", "馬丁鞋(Martin Shoes)", "MARTIN", and "Dr. Mannar" on the homepages of the stores, the linked webpages of the goods, the packaging of the shoe boxes, the wrapping paper and other places. Airwair filed a lawsuit with the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court on the grounds that the aforementioned acts of the defendant constituted trademark infringement.

Determination of the Court

Upon trial, the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court held that the plaintiff, by virtue of the authorization, is entitled to conduct sales and promotion concerning the No. G584207 trademark "DR. MARTENS" (hereinafter referred to as "the authorized trademark") in China and to file a civil lawsuit on the basis of the license. The authorized trademark has enjoyed a high reputation in China after a long period of advertisement, use and promotion, and has already become a famous trademark in the goods of "footwear, boots and clothing" on which it is approved for registration. Further, the sued infringing goods also pertain to footwear and boots goods, and because the defendant Hu has registered the No. 9780715 trademark for "Dr. Mannar", it is necessary to obtain the determination of the famous trademark in this case. The sued "Dr. mannar" "Dr. Mannar馬丁靴(Martin Boots)", "", "" and other marks are similar to the plaintiff's authorized trademarks "Dr. Martens", "馬丁(Martin) Dr. MARTENS", "", etc., in terms of the letter composition, pronunciation, and Chinese and English meanings. The clothing company in Shantou used the sued marks on footwear and boots goods and sold them on various online shopping platforms. Such act would easily make the relevant public believe that the goods have the same source or there is a close connection between their sources, and thus may easily confuse the public with source of the goods. In addition, there was no evidence in the case that the term "馬丁靴(Martin Boots)" is a legal or conventionally used common name. On the contrary, various advertisements and reports concerning the authorized trademark can all reflect that the term "馬丁靴(Martin Boots)" corresponds to or is directed to the authorized trademark, which has formed a certain correspondence with the authorized trademark. Therefore, the sued acts constitute an infringement of the authorized trademark.

In the end, the court ruled that the clothing company in Shantou and Hu should cease the infringement immediately and eliminate the influence and that punitive damages should be applied to fully support the litigation request for compensation of 3 million yuan by Airwair. This case is now in its second trial.

Typical Significance

This case is a typical case for a famous trademark to combat malicious registration and infringing acts, which helps deter the malicious infringing acts of "free-riding" in the market.

 

Keywords

主站蜘蛛池模板: 最美女人体内射精一区二区| 久久久亚洲欧洲日产国码农村| 97欧美精品系列一区二区| 国产精彩亚洲中文在线| 五月丁香综合激情六月久久| 久久精品中文字幕无码绿巨人| 国产日韩精品欧美2020区| 中文字幕日韩人妻在线视频| 午夜精品久久久久久久久日韩欧美| 亚洲高清一区二区三区不卡| 亚洲aⅴ无码专区在线观看q| 欧美成aⅴ人在线视频| 成人精品视频| 开心五月激情综合婷婷色| 强行交换配乱婬bd| 毛片无码一区二区三区a片视频 | 东北老女人高潮大喊舒服死了 | 日韩人妻无码一区2区3区里沙| 7777色鬼xxxx欧美色妇| 亚洲性无码av在线欣赏网| 内射口爆少妇麻豆| 亚洲国产精品无码专区影院| 欧美精品偷自拍另类在线观看| 亚洲女同成av人片在线观看| 人妻少妇精品一区二区三区| 国产成人亚洲精品另类动态图| 永久免费精品精品永久-夜色| 亚洲人成电影在线观看网色| 国产精品99久久久精品无码| 欧美黑人又粗又硬xxxxx喷水| 亚洲国产成人久久精品大牛影视 | 肉体暴力强伦轩在线播放| 日韩人妻无码一区二区三区久久99| 色综合久久久久久久久五月| 国产成人精品午夜福利在线观看| 国产福利无码一区二区在线| 亚洲熟女少妇精品| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 欧美日韩亚洲国产欧美电影 | 久久久久久久99精品免费观看| 中文人妻av高清一区二区|