Adidas'S Victory In The Case Of Infringement Of The Exclusive Right To Trademark

26 April, Liaoning Higher People's court held a typical case of judicial protection of intellectual property in Liaoning Province on 2011 26.

Among them, the 2 international brands.

According to the relevant person in charge of the higher people's Court of Liaoning Province, the basic situation of Adidas and Guangzhou Conway group sports goods Limited by Share Ltd, Guangzhou Conway Group Co., Ltd. and Li Gansu June's infringement of trademark exclusive rights are: the Adidas company registered the "G730835 bar" graphic trademark on the twenty-fifth category of commodities in March 17, 2000, and the defendant's comprehensive training shoes in its production and sale.

The court held that Adidas's "three bar" graphic trademark has established a high reputation in China and even the relevant public in the world.

There are four slashes in the upper class of the casual shoes and the training shoes of the comprehensive training shoes. Apart from a few slashes, they are basically the same as the registered trademarks of Adidas Company No. G730835 "three bars" in terms of graphic elements, basic composition, slash size ratio, slant inclination and so on. The whole structure is very similar, which makes it easy for the relevant public to confuse the source of the goods.

The defendant, without permission, will use the logo similar to the case registered trademark in the same commodity as a commodity decoration, which constitutes a violation of the exclusive right of registered trademark of Adidas company G730835.

The defendant immediately decided to stop the infringement and compensate Adidas for the economic loss of 30 thousand yuan.

In addition, Louis Weedon Marley Siti and Jiao Kang, Dalian Wenzhou city commercial and Trade Co., Ltd. infringed on trademark disputes. The basic situation is: plaintiff Louis Weedon Marley Siti has registered the trademark on eighteenth categories of commodities, and the defendant is in charge of leather goods and bags in Dalian Wenzhou city commodity exchange market.

The defendant's key package and wallet are marked with plaintiff's trademark.

The court held that the defendant's behavior was not legally authorized, and the goods sold were not legally owned, which was a product that infringed the exclusive rights of the plaintiff's registered trademark.

The defendant, Dalian Wenzhou city company, did not take any measures to prevent the sale of infringing goods in the market, which provided convenience for infringement cases.

The defendant, Jiao Kang and Dalian Wenzhou city commercial and Trade Co., Ltd. decided to stop the infringement immediately. The defendant, Jiao Kang, compensated the plaintiff Louis Weedon Marley Siti for economic losses of 19000 yuan. The defendant, Dalian Wenzhou city commercial and Trade Co., Ltd., compensated the plaintiff Louis Weedon Marley Siti for an economic loss of 5000 yuan.