Two Rooster Disputes In Garment Industry

The phenomenon of "near brand"

"This time, we have grasped a lot of facts about the infringement of infringers, including the control of their infringement marks, as well as all kinds of clothing with infringement marks, as well as specific sales locations. We can say that the evidence in every respect is very sufficient, which is also the reason for the smooth filing and trial."

Kark, managing director of Ningbo Le Kark apparel Co., Ltd.

Recently, the Zhejiang Provincial Higher People's court formally heard the appeal case of trademark dispute between Ningbo music Kark Clothing Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Le Kark") and Xiamen Jinji sporting goods Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Xiamen Golden Chicken company"), Shanghai Jinji sporting goods Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Shanghai Golden Chicken company"), Fujian Jinjiang city mojic shoes and Garment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "mojk company"). Finally, Kark Kark won the lawsuit again, and was awarded economic losses of 80 thousand yuan.

The case began in October 24, 2008 because of its right to use.

The court found that the defendant's Xiamen Jinji company and Shanghai Golden Chicken company used similar trademarks maliciously, causing the public to misunderstand the source of the goods that were controlled by the company and the registered trademark of Kark company or think that they had a specific relationship.

According to the first provision of article fifty-second of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China, without the permission of the trademark registrant, the use of a trademark which is the same or similar to its registered trademark on the same commodity or similar commodity is a violation of the exclusive right to use the registered trademark.

Accordingly, the Wenzhou intermediate people's court made a first instance judgment, ruled that the defendant infringed Kark's exclusive right to use the registered trademark and compensated the plaintiff's economic loss of 80 thousand yuan. At the same time, he demanded that the defendant immediately stop the infringement and publish a statement in the Xinmin Evening Paper to eliminate the infringement.

The origin of the LE COQ SPORTIF (Chinese name "Le Kark" and the graphic trademark "cock") dates back to 1882. The French Emile Camuset founded the sports brand LE COQ SPORTIF, which was started with sportswear and sports socks, and took the rooster as the brand graphic symbol.

In 1948, the French LE COQ SPORTIF was officially registered, and the LE COQ SPORTIF sponsored the French team in the 1982 World Cup, and gradually began to establish the leading brand position.

The "big cock" logo was first put into use in 1948.

The "big cock" is a symbol of France. This symbol stems from an ancient ethnic group living in France. They use the cockfighting pattern as the flag. Since then, the rooster's symbol has taken root in France and has become the spiritual symbol of the French nation.

LE COQ SPORTIF brand clothing and its "big rooster" image were very famous in Europe, and quickly swept the globe.

Since the LE COQ SPORTIF entered the Chinese market in 2004, its unique sports and leisure style has been well received by consumers, and is being pursued by the tide of personality and fashion.

In the clothing brand, "Li Kui" and "Li Gui" always follow the shadow.

As one of the famous brands of international sports, LE COQ SPORTIF, France, has also become the victim of infringement by "Li Gui".

In order to safeguard the trademark rights and interests and the pure brand origin of Kark, and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, Le Kark has collected a large amount of evidence of infringement, and has made full litigation preparation.

It has been verified that the infringers Xiamen Jinji company, Shanghai Golden Rooster company and mojk company have been using the graphic logo of LE COQ SPORTIF (Le Kark) graphics male Rooster pattern in the products and their outer packaging of sportswear, trousers, T-shirts and other clothing, socks, ball caps and other products that they produce and sell at least since 2006, and have used a lot of infringement marks in the activities of publicizing, promising sales, developing distributors and expanding sales network channels.

In June 2008, Le Kark, the Chinese right holder, Ningbo music Kark Clothing Co., Ltd. took up arms of the law and filed a lawsuit against the first intermediate people's Court of Wenzhou, and brought the three infringement company and the dealer selling the infringing goods to the court.

The court found that the infringement was established.

The court found that the defendant's Xiamen Jinji company and Shanghai Golden Chicken company used similar trademarks maliciously, causing the public to misunderstand the source of the goods that were controlled by the company and the registered trademark of Kark company or think that they had a specific relationship.

The losing party lodge an appeal against the first instance decision.

On March 15, 2010, the second instance opened in the higher people's Court of Zhejiang province.

Finally, the provincial high court dismissed all appeals from the appellant to maintain the first instance decision.

So far, Le Kark company has won a complete victory in this trademark infringement case.

In recent years, with the deepening of China's integration into the economic globalization, there are more and more cases involving disputes and disputes involving intellectual property rights.

Some enterprises maliciously confuse their relationship with famous brands, thus misleading consumers.

This phenomenon of "brand name" is common in the clothing industry.

The original pseudonym card is a direct and direct snatch, copying and copying the original brand names of foreign countries. Now the method is relatively concealed, which is slightly modified on the basis of the original trademark, but the ultimate goal is still to allow consumers to have a certain association with the original brand.

For example, is the wrinkle on the head of the "old man head" three or two? "Crocodile" crocodile mouth to the left or right? "Montagut" petals have several petals?

It is the use of consumer information asymmetry that makes some brands steal.

However, such behavior will eventually show its true form. It will not only infringe on the rights and interests of consumers, but also affect the development of enterprises themselves, seriously weaken the power and capability of independent innovation, and ultimately lead to the loss of core competitiveness.

In this sense, the rooster case is bound to have a positive impact on China's garment industry to promote independent innovation and cultivate its own brand.

In civil cases, decisions are difficult to enforce, but "trial results and compensation are currently being implemented."

This is the reply given by Wang Ke, managing director of Kark company.

We hope that the final judgment can be carried out smoothly. On the one hand, it embodies the dignity of the law. On the other hand, it can also serve as a warning for potential infringers.

In fact, do not say that enforcement. From the current actual situation, it is not easy for such civil cases to really enter the proceedings. Because of the fact that it is difficult to identify the facts, many trademark infringement cases in our country end up in the end.

In contrast, Le Kark's experience was lucky.

"Although we prosecute the infringer, we hope that the law can give us a fair play, but ultimately, the lawsuit can win, which is also an unexpected joy for us."

Wang can not be relieved to say.