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: 深夜福利啪啪片| 国产亚洲美女精品久久久| 国内露脸少妇精品视频| 护士脱了内裤让我爽了一夜视频| 国产亚洲精品久久久久丝瓜| 国产偷国产偷亚洲清高动态图 | 国产福利无码一区在线| 国产无遮挡又黄又大又爽| 变态sm天堂无码专区| 国色天香成人一区二区| 欧美日韩精品成人网视频| 国产精品成人99久久久久| 四虎影视在线影院在线观看| 亚洲成在人线av中文字幕喷水| 一本久道久久综合狠狠躁av| 久久婷婷国产剧情内射白浆| 久久天天躁夜夜躁狠狠综合| 欧美日韩国产综合草草| 中国做爰国产精品视频| 蜜芽久久人人超碰爱香蕉 | 无码h黄肉动漫在线观看网站| 蜜臀av在线无码国产| 亚洲精品国产精品乱码在线观看| 无尺码精品产品网站| 综合图片亚洲综合网站| 伊人久久大香线焦av色| 亚洲国产综合在线区尤物| 日本熟妇乱人伦a片免费高清| 日韩国产图片区视频一区| 国产无遮挡又黄又爽奶头| 免费午夜福利不卡片在线播放| 亚洲精品久久久久午夜福利 | 国产精品成人免费视频网站| 国产猛烈高潮尖叫视频免费| 亚洲精品一区二区三区婷婷月| 国产人妻人伦精品1国产| 国产精品女主播在线视频| 在线黑人抽搐潮喷| 天天摸日日摸狠狠添| 99久久精品毛片免费播放高潮 | 国产成人av综合久久|