Overseas Purchase Of Luxury Goods To Sell Chanel Lawsuit

On the grounds of trademark infringement and unfair competition, luxury magnates

Chongqing Jin Mei Xi department was sued to court and claimed $300 thousand. The case was opened yesterday in the Municipal Intermediate Court.

In fact, in recent years, many enterprises have not been authorized to sell.

The defendant went to court: Kang Tai sued Shanghai Kathy Industrial and Trading Company; Cartire moved the 1 shop to court; LV brought 19 merchants to court in Nanjing.

Why do these stores need to be foreign brands, so how can they stop looking at other people's faces?

Yesterday,

The city's first intermediate people's court heard publicly that Chanel, a luxury giant, was suing Chongqing's golden hill department store.

In the afternoon, Kang Entai, another Swiss luxury goods company, filed a lawsuit against Zegna's trademark "Zegna" in the court.

Chanel sues Kim Mei Xi claim 300 thousand. In the public hearing, Chanel and Kim Mei Xi commissioned lawyers to appear in court.

Stores selling Chanel related products in Jin Mei Xi department store

Foreign brands into the defendant business newspaper graphics

Roger, lawyer of Chanel and Luo Zhenghong, a lawyer of Beijing law firm, stated that in 2011, the French Chanel company found in Chongqing's Golden West Department store that the company had uncovered some English names and icons of Chanel enterprises in some windows and counters, and sold products marked with Chanel names.

In April of this year, Chanel found that the store had not yet been rectify, and reported it to the business sector in Chongqing.

After the intervention of the business sector, Chanel said it hoped that Kim Mei Si could carry out rectification.

However, in September of this year, Chanel found that Kim Mei Xi department did not correct the above actions.

Subsequently, Chanel collected a lot of photos about the infringement of Jin Mei Xi department store and notarized it.

In September of this year, Chanel introduced Kim Mei Xi department store to the first municipal hospital.

In the courtroom, Chanel attorney Luo Zhenghong said that many years ago, Chanel registered Chanel related trademark, English, graphics and other trademarks in China. Its English name "CHANEL" was identified as a well-known trademark in many categories by the Trademark Office and the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board, and was protected by cross class.

However, Kim Mei Xi Department has used Chanel's English name in the shopping malls without authorization. Its behavior has constituted a violation of the trademark right of the company and is an act of unfair competition.

Chanel filed a lawsuit against Kim Mei Xi, claiming a claim of 300 thousand yuan.

Kim Maxi said it used "spy equipment".

In the face of Chanel's lawsuit and evidence, Zhao Yang, lawyer of Kim Mei Xi department store and lawyer of Chongqing Bajun law firm, said that Chanel sold in shopping malls is a genuine commodity and has a legal access channel.

For this reason, they presented the Chanel's sales orders, customs clearance procedures, etc.

At the same time, Kim Mei Xi department stores said that the photos produced by Chanel showed no obvious coincidence with the time specified by the notary office, and they did not recognize the evidence.

In addition, some of the photos provided by the other party were taken by a watch. Such a watch should be "spy device", and the photos taken can not be identified as evidence in this case.

To this end, Kim Mei Xi department stores said they did not infringe on the trademark rights of Chanel, nor did they carry out so-called false propaganda.

Even in the store windows, counters and other places, there are Chanel enterprises' English names and icons, in order to play a good indication role.

I hope the court can dismiss Chanel's claim.

As the attorneys of both sides are general agents, when the court adjourned, the collegiate court does not conciliation between the two parties, only to indicate that the court will be sentenced for a choice of day.

Is the dispute focused on infringement of trademark rights or rational use?

During the trial, the focus of the debate between the two sides was mainly on whether or not trademark infringement and unfair competition were involved.

{page_break}

The acting lawyer of Chanel company believes that without the permission of Chanel, Kim Mei Xi department store has been using the word "CHANEL" and Chanel logo, and has infringed its trademark right.

For this reason, since 2011, Chanel has applied for notarization three times and obtained notarization.

According to the Attorney General of Kim Mei Xi department, two of the three notaries provided by Chanel were inconsistent with the relevant photos.

At the same time, the use of "spy watches" and other espionage devices in the process of obtaining evidence by Chanel should not be recognized by the court.

Chanel has no other evidence that Chanel trademark is used in its business premises.

The lawyer said that Kim Mei Xi Department acquired legitimate business rights through parallel import.

Even if Kim Mei Xi department stores use Chanel trademark, they are also promoting and promoting their products and services. This is a guiding and malicious use and should be considered reasonable utilization.

Chanel attorney said that Kim Mei Xi department store has been misleading description, so that consumers think it is Chanel's exclusive stores or outlets, in fact, Kim Mei Xi department store has not been officially authorized by Chanel, this behavior is false propaganda, constitutes unfair competition.

Kim Mei West said that at present, Chanel did not provide effective evidence to confirm its statement. It is only subjective and not based on facts.

Case analysis is an indicative fair use or does not constitute infringement.

Who will win the lawsuit, Chanel and Kim Mei Xi?

Yesterday, Deng Hongguang, a doctoral tutor of the Trademark Law of Southwest University of Political Science and Law, said that if Kim Mei Xi's Chanel had regular access channels, it was a genuine product purchased from a legitimate retailer. It was an indicative and reasonable use of the trademark (i.e., in order to explain its goods or services, others had to mention the trademark of the trademark owner to describe its goods or services on the premise of good faith and reasonable use), which might not constitute infringement.

In court, neither side had any objection to the authenticity of the goods.

Prior to the interview, the responsible person of the Xidi Mountain Group has said that unlike many luxury outlets, the luxury goods sold by the group are all regularly purchased in Europe and Hongkong, and sales staff are also members of the group.

However, more industry insiders say Kim Mei Xi is likely to be sentenced to compensation.

He Tianqiang, chief lawyer of Chongqing's law firm, said that the mode of buying luxury goods from overseas is still controversial. "From the point of view of market competition, this is a suspicion of disrupting the normal market order, which will inevitably lead to disputes with luxury brand owners."

Fu Qiang, a professor at the school of Business Administration of Chongqing University, said: "the behavior of a department store is bound to infringe on the trademark of Chanel, and it is very likely that it will take full responsibility."

Zhou Ting, a deputy director of the luxury research center of the University of foreign trade and economics and a luxury goods expert, told the business daily: "this is an obvious infringement and is unlikely to be disclaimed."

News deep competition for luxury goods into the defendant market why lose more?

In fact, the encounter of Kim Mei Xi department store is not a case.

"This phenomenon is very common, especially in the field of electricity supplier."

Zhou Ting, deputy director of luxury research center of foreign economic and trade university and luxury expert, said.

It is reported that many international luxury brands have been prosecuting domestic department stores, and many of them have been defeated in the domestic department stores.

Combing reporters found that in the case of Kang Tai, the prosecution of Kim Mei Xi department store, in November 2004, Shanghai Kay Fe industry and Trade Development Co., Ltd. was sentenced to trademark infringement, and compensation to Conway compensation for economic losses of 300 thousand yuan.

In April 2008, a shopping malls in Chengdu sold Kun Tai trademark clothing, shoes and hats and other commodities, and used its trademark in the sales place, and was sentenced to 14 million yuan in tort compensation.

In early July of this year, luxury brand Cartire went to court on the "1 shop" of the online supermarket, saying that "shop No. 1" sold the goods not belonging to the plaintiff on the online shopping platform, and highlighted the use of the Cartire classic style which is exactly the same as the plaintiff's trademark, and "Cartier's collection of..."

Such publicity will constitute unfair competition against the plaintiff's exclusive right to use the registered trademark and false propaganda. The court of Pudong will open the court to hear the case.

Why is there a large number of sales models that are highly controversial and may even face legal penalties?

"This is related to the brand building of enterprises and the whole consumption environment."

Fu Qiang, a professor at the school of Business Administration of Chongqing University, said that on the one hand, China's luxury consumption crowd is expanding, and the high profit margins of luxury goods attract many businesses to enter.

"It takes a long cycle to create luxury brands, which allows many shopping centers to take a direct buy and sell way to enter the luxury sector, not only to get a high profit, but also to help improve the quality and image of the mall."

He said that, on the other hand, it is also related to the legal consciousness of many businessmen, but not enough attention is paid to trademarks and intellectual property rights.

Fu Qiang suggested that enterprises should formally authorize the manufacturers to sell luxury goods and follow the road of standardization.

Zhou Ting, deputy director of luxury research center of the University of foreign trade and economics, and luxury goods expert, also said that if we need to operate luxury goods in regular department stores, we must cooperate with their manufacturers or authorized dealers.