Clothing "Near The Name Brand" Is Actually Drinking Poison To Quench Thirst &Nbsp; Independent Innovation Is The Key.

On the invasion of Lecoqsportif (Chinese name Kark, commonly known as the French cock) brand.

This case has been in Ningbo since October 24, 2008.

In April 7, 2009, the case was heard at the intermediate people's Court of Wenzhou.

The court found that the two designs were similar trademarks.

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 court made a first instance judgment and ruled that the defendant's three companies violated the exclusive right of registered trademark of Kark company, which required compensation for the economic loss of 80 thousand yuan and published a statement to eliminate the infringement.

After the judgment of first instance, Xiamen Golden Rooster and mojk company appealed against the decision.

In March 15, 2010, the Zhejiang Provincial Higher People's Court opened the court to hear the case. In April 12th, the Zhejiang Provincial High Court upheld the final judgment of upheld the original judgment of the first instance.

However, two infringement companies have raised doubts about the final judgment and submitted a retrial application to the Supreme People's court.

In July 21st, the Supreme People's court held an inquiring procedure for application for rehearing in the intellectual property court.

After the examination and analysis by the Supreme People's court, the final ruling was issued in September 7th: the retrial application of Xiamen Golden Rooster and mojk company was rejected.

The dispute over the right to exclusive use of the trademark of the rooster brand has also been settled.

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

This cock

In fact, the phenomenon of "brand name" is common in the clothing industry.

The original Katakana card is a direct and direct snatch, copying and copying the original brand names of foreign countries. The present method can be said to be relatively concealment, 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.

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

However, with the development of economy, the Chinese market is accelerating the integration with the international market. China's judicial system in the field of intellectual property protection is more and more perfect, which paved the way for corporate brand protection.

Shanshan stock company and Kark company have taken legal measures to safeguard their legitimate trademark rights and interests in a fair and strict court.

At the same time, the judgment of this case also sounded the alarm for such "brand name" behavior.

In the market economy environment, the importance of brand to an enterprise is self-evident. Adopting unfair competition means "brand name" seems to be a shortcut to establish its own brand, but it only allows enterprises to get short-term benefits. In the long run, this behavior not only lets enterprises bear dual moral, legal risks and economic risks to the obligee and consumers, but also seriously weakens the power and capability of independent innovation, and ultimately leads to the loss of core competitiveness, so it can be described as "taking poison to quench thirst".

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.