A Shenzhen company named its tea products "Xiao Guan X Cha", imitating the "Xiao Guan Cha", a new online celebrity in China's tea industry. Xiao Guan Cha sued the defendant to court. Recently, after the trial, the Baoan Court ruled that the defendant immediately stop the infringement and compensate the plaintiff for economic losses of one million yuan. At the same time, the defendant should post an apology in the newspaper to eliminate the impact.
Beijing Xiao Guan Cha Co., Ltd. is a newly emerging "celebrity" company in China's tea industry that sells "small cans of tea". Its reputation has risen in recent years, and its sales have risen steadily. However, the company found that Shenzhen Company A had used the similar logo of its "Xiao Guan Cha" trademark, No. 15908554 and No. 16791551, on the prominent position of the tea products produced and sold by Company A without its permission. The similar logos of trademarks can easily cause confusion and misunderstanding of the origin of the goods by the relevant public and infringe on Xiao Guan Cha's exclusive right to use registered trademarks. Moreover, Dai was the actual controller of Shenzhen A Company and its related company Shenzhen B Company. The behavior of using different legal entities to engage in infringements to evade punishment took the two companies to court.
The Baoan Court held that the plaintiff enjoyed the exclusive right to use trademarks No. 15908554 and No. 16795551 by the law after trial. The registered trademarks involved in the case had a high reputation when the alleged infringement emerged. In the isolated comparison state, the two defendants used the logo on the alleged infringing product to be similar to the plaintiff's registered trademark, and the alleged infringing product was a product approved for use by the plaintiff's trademark. Therefore, the defendant's behavior infringed the plaintiff's right to exclusive use of the registered trademark. The defendant Dai should have known that the company violated the legitimate rights and interests of others' but still used his account to collect the payment, which constituted a joint infringement with the defendant Shenzhen B Company. The second defendant shall bear civil liability to stop the infringement, compensate for losses, and eliminate adverse effects.
The Baoan Court made the following judgment. The two defendants immediately stopped infringing the plaintiff's registered trademarks No. 15908554 and No. 16795551; the two defendants jointly compensate the plaintiff for economic losses (including reasonable expenses) of 1,000,000 yuan; the two defendants publish a statement in the "China Industry and Commerce News" to eliminate Adverse effects (the content of the statement must be reviewed by this court).
The latter two defendants dissatisfied and appealed to the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court. The court of the second instance ruled to reject the appeal of the second defendant and uphold the original judgment.
Source: China IP Today