国精一二二产品无人区免费应用,精品夜夜爽欧美毛片视频,99久久久无码国产精品免费,精人妻无码一区二区三区

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: 国产成人精品热玖玖玖 | 日日碰狠狠躁久久躁2023| 成人国产精品一区二区免费看| 人妻无码一区二区视频| 男人边吻奶边挵进去视频| 亚洲欧洲无码专区av| 免费看美女被靠到爽的视频| 久久中文字幕无码a片不卡古代| 真人与拘做受免费视频| 色综合久久天天综合| 在线无码va中文字幕无码| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品被多人伦好爽 | 性欧美丰满熟妇xxxx性| 国产精品香蕉在线的人| 久久国产精品成人片免费| 韩国三级在线 中文字幕 无码| 精品久久人妻av中文字幕| 久久99精品久久久久久噜噜 | av在线网站无码不卡的| 国产亚洲欧美日韩夜色凹凸成人| 人人妻人人爽人人澡欧美一区| 中文精品久久久久人妻不卡| 国产精品天干天干综合网| 国产午夜精品一区二区三区软件| 一本无码av中文出轨人妻| 奇米影视7777狠狠狠狠色| 亚洲第一无码专区天堂| 亚洲日本中文字幕一区二区三区| 国产av一码二码三码无码| 成人亚洲a片v一区二区三区蜜臀| 亚欧av无码乱码在线观看性色| 综合一区无套内射中文字幕| 国产欧美现场va另类| 国产美女遭强高潮免费 | 无码纯肉视频在线观看| 人妻丰满熟妇av无码区免| 亚洲免费观看视频| 日本韩国亚洲欧美在线| 国产精品18久久久久久欧美| 久久中文字幕人妻熟av女蜜柚m | 国产a∨精品一区二区三区不卡|