"Tesco" Trademark Dispute Second Instance: Xinle Clothing Department Stores Compensation 150 Thousand Yuan

< p > New Tesco, < a target= "_blank" href= "http://www.91se91.com/" > clothing < /a > Department Store Co., Ltd. used the trademark of top super company "Tesco" when establishing department store, and the defendant was sent to court.

In the first instance, the defendant ordered Xinle to purchase the department store to stop infringing the exclusive right of the "Tesco" registered trademark, and to compensate the plaintiff for exceeding the company's economic loss of 150000 yuan and the reasonable rights protection cost of 70000 yuan.

The plaintiff refused to accept the appeal and asked Xinle to purchase the department store to change the name of the enterprise within a time limit. The name of the changed enterprise should not contain the same or similar words as "Tesco".

The Shenzhen intermediate people's court made a final judgment after the second instance: dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment.

< /p >

< p > < strong > accuse infringement < /strong > < /p >.

< p > Top super company won the No. 3982000th "Tesco" trademark registration certificate in January 21, 2007, and approved services for thirty-fifth categories of advertising, advertising planning, business management assistance, import and export agents, promotion (for others) and other services.

< /p >

< p > Top super company set up TESCO Tesco Longcheng store in Longgang District of Shenzhen.

In April 29, 2011, Xinle clothing Department Store Co., Ltd. was founded in Xinle to buy general merchandise and opened in July 2011, and its business place is close to TESCO's Tesco Longcheng store.

Advertisements posted by Xinle department store in its advertising column marked "grand opening of department stores in Xinle" in July 1st. The word "new" and "Tesco department store" are different in font color and font size and location, and prominently used the words "Tesco department store".

< /p >

< p > Top super company believes that Xinle's purchase of general merchandise infringes its exclusive right to register a trademark, and appealed to the court to request Xinle to buy the department store to stop infringing the registered trademark of Tesco and stop using the word "Tesco" in any place and in its business place, and change the name of the enterprise and compensate for the loss.

< /p >

< p > defendant Xinle bought a department store arguing that its use of "Tesco department store" logo is its legal use.

< /p >

< p > < strong > tort is established < /strong > < /p >.

< p > the Longgang court held that the evidence provided by the top super company shows that the reports and ranking of many mainstream media websites show that the TESCO Tesco brand has a high reputation.

< /p >

< p > from the proper use of the name of the enterprise, the plaque of the enterprise name can be simplified, but it should be reported to the registration authority for the record.

The name of an enterprise should generally be standardized, and it should be the same as the registered enterprise name when used.

Specific industries allow for the proper and simplified use of enterprise names in accordance with the principle of good faith, but only on plaque.

< /p >

< p > the defendant, Xinle purchasing department store, has marked prominently the use of "Tesco department store" logo in the plaque, interior and exterior decorations and advertisements in its business premises. This behavior does not conform to the stipulation of "simplifying" the use of enterprise names according to the law of the enterprise, and the purchase of general merchandise stores in Xinle has not been filed with the registration authorities according to law.

Secondly, considering the purpose, content, mode and object of the service, Xinle purchases department store service department department store, and the sales promotion service (for others) approved by the top 3982000th company's "Tesco" trademark registration office is the same service item.

Xinle purchase department stores in their business premises, a large number of prominently used "Tesco department store", "Xinle purchase department store" logo in the "Tesco" two characters and the top super company 3982000th "Tesco" registered trademark is exactly the same, "department store" two words only play the role of marking the service items, there is no difference between the role of service providers, no significant; and the new Tesco department stores used the "Xinle purchase department store" logo, deliberately adopted a smaller font for "new", and the "new" color is also inconsistent with "Tesco department store", deliberately highlighted "Tesco Department store" logo.

So the behavior of new Tesco department is enough to make the public concerned misunderstand or confuse.

< /p >

< p > the Longgang court ruled that the defendant's purchase of general merchandise in Xinle stopped infringing Tesco's exclusive right to use the registered trademark, and compensated the economic loss of the top super company by 150000 yuan and the reasonable rights protection cost of 70000 yuan.

< /p >

< p > < strong > maintain the original sentence < /strong > < /p >

< p > Top super company appealed to the Shenzhen intermediate people's court against the court's decision, requesting Xinle to purchase the department store to change the name of the enterprise within a specified time limit, and the name of the changed enterprise should not contain the same or similar words as "Tesco".

< /p >

< p > the Shenzhen intermediate people's court believes that the case for this case is a violation of the right to exclusive use of the registered trademark, and the request for protection is the registered trademark No. 3982000th Tesco's exclusive right to use the registered trademark.

The court of first instance has concluded that the intentional use of Tesco department stores in Xinle constitutes a violation of the exclusive right to use registered trademarks, and the purchase of department stores in Xinle should stop using the logo of Tesco department store.

The appellant only advocates that the appellant Xinle purchase general merchandise infringes on his exclusive right to use the registered trademark, and does not prove that the appellant's use of his name in business activities is enough to cause confusion or misrecognition of the relevant public.

Therefore, the court of first instance held that under the circumstances of the present evidence, it is necessary for Xinle to purchase the department store to stop using the mark of Tesco department store and maintain the appellant's right to use the registered trademark.

If the appellant super super company has new evidence to prove that the appellant even uses his enterprise name in business activities, it still leads to the confusion and misrecognition of the relevant public to the parties, and can be solved by way of further prosecution.

Therefore, the Shenzhen intermediate people's court held that the appellant's appeal grounds for changing the name of the appellant could not be established without the new evidence.

< /p >

< p > < strong > [judge comment] < /strong > /p >

< p > the Shenzhen intermediate people's court made the final judgment: dismissed the appeal and upheld the original judgment.

< /p >

< p > judge Jiang Xiaoxi, the intellectual property court of the Shenzhen intermediate people's court, believes that a registered trademark is a mark to distinguish the source of different goods or services. The name of an enterprise is a mark that distinguishes different market players. The functions and functions of the two are different, but both are administrative authorization obtained according to the corresponding legal procedures, and are protected accordingly according to the corresponding laws.

Because of the regional restrictions on the approval of enterprise names, the general principle of legal protection is the right of the enterprises to enjoy the corresponding name in the approved area.

The right to an enterprise's name shall not be infringed on the prior rights of others when it is used in a standardized way.

It is only when the abbreviation of the enterprise name is used in a standardized way that the confusion and mistaken recognition of the public can not be avoided can it be necessary to change the name of the enterprise.

< /p >