What Is The Charm Of Puma'S "Leopard Figure"?

The "leopard figure" that triggered litigation.

Last year, the international famous sports brand "Puma" (PUMA) company claimed that they found that a shopping malls in Futian District did not get permission to sell the men's slippers using their registered trademark "leopard graphics". The company's interests were seriously infringed. The shopping mall was sent to the court. It was put forward that the store stopped the infringement, compensated 50 thousand yuan, and apologized in the newspaper for three requests.

Yesterday morning, Futian court heard the case.

It is understood that in June last year, the German Rudolf Das sporting goods company, which produced Puma sportswear, believed that the pattern of a slipper sold in a large shopping mall in Futian District was a trademark of the company's registered "leopard graph", which was not authorized by the plaintiff company.

As a result, the company's employees, accompanied by notaries, bought a pair of men's slippers at a price of 16.8 yuan in a large shopping mall.

The notary shall supervise the scene and notarized the notarization of the purchased goods by the notary.

The shopping mall was then brought to court.

In the trial, the judges organized the two sides to mediate, but the two sides did not make a statement in court, and the case is still under further trial.

Tit for tat versus plaintiff slippers trademark resembles Puma's "leopard graphics", "PUMA" trademark, "leopard graphics" trademark and "PUMA and leopard graphics" trademark, which is originally created by plaintiffs and used in sports clothing, sports shoes and other products. "Puma" registered in China in 1978 "PUMA" trademark, "leopard graphics" trademark and "PUMA and leopard graphics" trademark.

After obtaining the registration, the plaintiff used a large number of trademarks in China.

The existence of these fake and counterfeit products has seriously eroded the market of the plaintiff's genuine products. On the other hand, the fake and counterfeit products are generally of poor quality. After buying and using the products, consumers also believe that the quality of the plaintiff's products is low, which has caused a very bad effect on the reputation of the plaintiff. The pattern of men's slippers sold in the shopping mall is similar and similar to that of the company's "leopard graph", so the claim for compensation of 50 thousand yuan is reasonable.

The defendant's plaintiff must prove that the registered trademark of the plaintiff's company is "leopard figure". The trademark of the male slippers sold in the shopping mall is obviously different from that of the pattern. The store can not see the pattern on the slippers has the leopard graphics. Moreover, the plaintiff can not prove that the slipper figures sold in the store are similar to those of the Puma company. According to the provisions of the civil procedure law, the plaintiff should bear the adverse consequences of giving evidence.

In addition, the store only sold two pairs of slippers. The slippers were wholesale from the wholesale market. There was no sales contract, and the total purchase was 300 yuan. After receiving the response from the plaintiff, the store immediately unloaded the slippers and did not affect the reputation of the plaintiff at all.

The plaintiff's compensation for the loss of fifty thousand yuan does not have any basis, and it provides evidence for the plaintiff to claim compensation for his losses.

The sale of counterfeit and counterfeit goods "leopard graph" logo in the mall was registered in China in 1978, including casual shoes and sports shoes. Slippers should be included in the slippers. According to the classification of shoes by the General Administration of industry and commerce, the logo of "leopard graphics" should include slippers.

According to the trademark law, a trademark can distinguish visible signs (including words, graphics, letters, numbers, three dimensional signs and color combinations) of goods (including services) and other goods (including services).

Consumers buy this slipper mainly by looking at the logo of the "leopard graph" and will think that the shoe is made by Puma company.

So the slippers sold in the mall are the same as "leopard graphics".

In order to crack down on the infringement, the plaintiff conducted a large number of investigations. The survey showed that the products sold by the defendant were used by the plaintiff "leopard graph" trademark, and the manufacturer or seller of the product was not authorized to produce or sell by the plaintiff. The products sold in the mall were counterfeit and counterfeit goods.

The plaintiff did not register a trademark on slippers. The plaintiff did not register its trademark "leopard figure" on slippers, nor did it produce "leopard figure" slippers or provide samples of "leopard figure" slippers, including no slippers in the registered trademarks.

Slippers and slippers are completely different types of shoes. According to the trademark law, the plaintiff company does not enjoy the trademark rights of "leopard graphics" for slippers, nor does it have the right to sue the shopping malls on the basis of their registered trademark rights.

Shenzhen News Network