"Montagut" Underwear Uses "AB" Logo Two Agents Are Sentenced To Trademark Infringement.

Today, the second intermediate people's Court of Shanghai made a first instance judgment on the trademark infringement dispute. The two defendants were ordered to stop production and sale of the underwear containing the "AB" letter immediately and compensate the plaintiff for 100 thousand yuan in economic losses.

In September 2000, the two "AB" trademark was identified as a well-known trademark by the State Trademark Office.

In January 2007, the plaintiff found that the brand name of Montagut's woollen underwear certificate issued by Guang Nuo company and the sales agent of "Montagut" wool underwear was used by the company. The "AB" letter was similar to the plaintiff's two "AB" registered trademark.

For this reason, AB company brought the company and the company to court on the grounds of trademark infringement.

They have the "AB" letter on the "men's super soft AB wool underwear", the purpose is to show that a "AB yarn" material is used in underwear production.

The plaintiff's two "AB" trademark is a well-known trademark, but Montagut is the top brand in the world, and its influence is higher than that of the plaintiff. Therefore, it is not necessary to deliberately copy the plaintiff's trademark and do not infringe the plaintiff's trademark right.

Therefore, the act of two defendants does not constitute trademark infringement.

Two although the defendant argued that the "AB" letter refers to the "AB" yarn raw material, but in the textile industry, "AB" has different meanings, including "antibacterial".

"AB yarn" refers to the composite yarn made of two different components of fiber, while the label of the defendant's qualification tag is "100% Superfine Merino wool", which is quite different from the concept of "AB yarn". The two defendants also did not provide the relevant evidence of the production of "AB yarn" raw material for wool underwear.

Two the defendant knew that the "AB" trademark had a high reputation and was a well-known trademark, but it used the same "AB" as the main body of the plaintiff's two trademark in the same commodity name. This behavior is enough to mislead the public.

Even if the two defendants said that the "Montagut" trademark is more influential than the "AB" brand, it is also easy for consumers to confuse and misunderstand the underwear products produced and sold by both sides.

Therefore, the actions of the two defendants constitute a violation of the two exclusive rights of the registered trademark of the plaintiff, and at the same time, infringe upon the well-known trademark of the plaintiff, and shall bear the civil liability for stopping the infringement and compensation for damages.

Two defendants should be jointly and severally liable for damages.

In view of the two defendants' interests due to infringement and the loss of the plaintiff due to infringement, it is difficult to ascertain the nature of the comprehensive tort, the consequences of the infringement, the reputation of the trademark and the reasonable expenses of the plaintiff to stop the infringement.