In daily life, many consumers have had this experience: They planned to buy a product of a well-known brand, but when they took a closer look, the trademarks were slightly different.
Recently, the Supreme People's Court disclosed the trial status of the trademark infringement and unfair competition case of "Wusu" v. "Niaosu": The court ruled that the defendant constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition, and ordered it to stop infringement, compensate for losses and reasonable rights protection fees 2.08 million yuan, to eliminate the impact, Niaosu Company stopped using the "Niaosu" font size .
"Wusu" and "Niaosu"
There is only one "dot" difference between the Chinese trademarks
Xinjiang Wusu Company has been producing Wusu beer since 1986. Since 2006, it has registered the Chinese characters "Wusu" and "Wusu" on beer and other products. There are many registered trademarks such as "wusu" in Chinese pinyin. Through its long-term continuous use and promotion, Wusu has a high influence in the domestic beer industry and has been recognized as a Xinjiang famous brand product and Xinjiang famous trademark many times.
Since 2016, Xinjiang Wusu Company has been using the packaging decoration of "Red Canned Wusu Beer 500ml" and has a high reputation in the national beer market.
In 2020, a red canned 500ml beer similar to Wusu beer appeared on the market, called "Niaosu". In the word "bird" of "Niaosu" beer, the "dot" stroke is replaced by a reduced "lightning" icon, which is only one "dot" different from the Chinese trademark of Wusu beer.
△ Comparison chart between "Wusu" beer and "Niaosu" beer
Wusu Beer believes that Niaosu Beer's behavior "free rides" and constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition. Wusu Company sued the manufacturer, entrusting party, and entrusted party listed on the Niaosu beer packaging to the court, demanding that the defendants stop infringement, compensate for losses and reasonable rights protection fees of 2.08 million yuan.
The court determined that "Niaosu" beer constituted
infringement of trademark rights and unfair competition
The Nanjing Intermediate People's Court found that Nanjing Niaosu Beer Company was established in August 2020, and the corporate name of Xinjiang Wusu Company is "Wusu" It already had high visibility and influence when it was founded. The two parties are competitors in the same industry. Nanjing Niaosu Beer Company still invented a highly similar "Niaosu" as its corporate name even when it should have known.
Judge Li Wenda of the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court said:
The logo used by the allegedly infringing "Niaosu" beer is compared with the registered trademark "Wusu" involved. The two are very similar, which can easily lead to confusion or misunderstanding by consumers, constituting trademark infringement. .
The packaging and decoration of the red canned Wusu beer involved in the case has been promoted and used for a long time and has high market influence and popularity. Although there are differences in details between the packaging and decoration of the allegedly infringing "Niaosu" beer and the red canned Wusu beer involved, they are highly similar overall. As competitors in the same industry, the accused infringers still use infringing packaging and decoration even when they should know about it, which objectively can easily lead to confusion or misunderstanding among the relevant public, constituting unfair competition.
△The first-instance trial of this case was held simultaneously online and offline (screenshot of trial video)
Niaosu Beer filed an appeal
The second instance upheld the original verdict: the intention of "free riding" was obvious
The Nanjing Intermediate People's Court supported the Xinjiang Wusu Beer Company's claims in the first instance. The defendants concerned expressed dissatisfaction and appealed, and the Jiangsu Provincial Higher People's Court made a second-instance judgment on the case.
Judge Tang Jing of the Third Civil Tribunal of the Jiangsu Provincial Higher People's Court said that the defendant's subjective intention of "free riding" was obvious, which was contrary to the basic principle of good faith that operators should abide by, and constituted unfair competition. Therefore, the second instance judgment dismissed the appeal and upheld it. original judgment.
Xu Changhai, judge of the Third Civil Division of the Supreme People's Court and director of the Comprehensive Affairs Office, believes that this case is a typical case of using strict and fair justice to stimulate innovation and optimize the legal business environment. In the case, the perpetrator maliciously registered and used the trademarks, trade names and other commercial logos of well-known enterprises with certain influence, causing market confusion. The judgment severely cracked down on this infringement and effectively curbed the practice of clinging to other people's business reputation and product reputation. The act of obtaining illegal benefits reflects the judicial concept of strict protection.
△Comparison of the trademarks of "Wusu" beer and "Niaosu" beer
