YOUNGOR'S Initiative To Sue For Injustice Is Not Infringement.

In July last year, YOUNGOR group was accused of violating the trademark rights of others.

To this end, the YOUNGOR group initiated the judicial process, and demanded that it do not constitute infringement of the exclusive right of a registered trademark.

Yesterday afternoon, the people's Court of Yinzhou District made a first instance judgment on the special lawsuit, and the plaintiff YOUNGOR group's petition was supported.

It is understood that this is the first intellectual property related case since the court of Yinzhou obtained jurisdiction over some intellectual property cases last year.

YOUNGOR was accused of infringing trademark rights. In March 20, 2008, YOUNGOR group received a warning letter from Wuhan citizen Li Moufa. According to Li, he registered the English "DP" trademark in August 21, 2003, and approved the use of commodities in twenty-fifth categories, namely clothing, shoes, hats and so on.

However, he found that the YOUNGOR group used the "DP" logo on some shirts and women's garments produced by him, which was the same as the registered trademark of "DP", which infringed on the legal right to exclusive use of registered trademarks.

Lee asked YOUNGOR group to immediately stop using the "DP" logo and compensate for its losses.

In April 8th, Li complained to the Yinzhou District business department and demanded that YOUNGOR group's infringement be investigated.

In July 7th and 8th, the Beijing News and the first financial daily published articles respectively, saying that YOUNGOR group was suspected of violating Lee's exclusive right to use the registered trademark. Li has filed a lawsuit with the Chaoyang District people's Court of Beijing for compensation of 10 million yuan.

After the two articles were reprinted through the Internet, they had a greater impact nationwide.

But YOUNGOR group has not received the summons of Chaoyang Court, that is to say, the fact that Li sued YOUNGOR group does not exist.

In July 24th last year, shortly after media coverage of the dispute, YOUNGOR group filed a lawsuit against the Yinzhou District people's court and sued Li, asking him to confirm that it did not constitute a violation of the exclusive right of a registered trademark.

YOUNGOR group proposed that the "DP" marked on the shirt is the abbreviation of English Durable Press, which means that it is durable and ironed. Marking the letter is that the YOUNGOR group produced this kind of shirt with anti crease finishing technology.

As a general abbreviation for fabric anti crease finishing technology in the clothing industry, "DP" has been widely recognized and widely used by the scientific research institutions and the clothing industry. According to the relevant laws, the use of the abbreviation in their shirts does not constitute infringement.

In December 25th last year, the Yinzhou court held a public hearing on this particular intellectual property case.

In the trial, the defendant Li still insisted that the YOUNGOR group infringed.

Why did YOUNGOR not constitute infringement? The court's decision yesterday supported the plaintiff's YOUNGOR group's appeal. In the judgment, the court made a statement on the basis of the decision: "DP" is a general abbreviation for the fabric wrinkle finishing technology, which is widely used in the field of professional research of clothing. In the field of production, there are also enterprises using the abbreviation. Therefore, the plaintiff used the anti wrinkle finishing technology to mark the "DP" on the cotton ironing shirt to express the quality of the garment.

The forty-ninth provision of the regulations on the implementation of the trademark law stipulates: "the general name, figure, model of the commodity contained in the registered trademark, or directly indicating the quality, main raw materials, functions, purposes, weight, quantity and other characteristics of the commodity, or the place name, shall not be prohibited by the Registrar's exclusive right holder."

Therefore, although "DP" is a registered trademark of the defendant, because the "DP" is the general abbreviation for the finishing technology of clothing material, the plaintiff has the right to use it properly.

What is the proper use?

The court held that consideration should be made from three aspects, one of which is "to consider whether the purpose of user use is justified, that is, whether subjectively want to deliberately cause confusion between the public and other people's trademarks".

The court is particularly interested in the identification of this point: the plaintiff's "YOUNGOR YOUNGOR" trademark is a well-known trademark in the top 500 brands of China, with a brand value of nearly ten billion yuan. Its shirts are also famous brand products in China, and the "DP cotton free ironing fine shirts" is a key new product of the state.

In contrast, the defendant's "DP" trademark is relatively low in popularity, so the plaintiff can not deliberately let the public mistake their products for a relatively low reputation and no shirt Market Share (the defendant claims to only produce women's clothing) defendant products.

Accordingly, the court concluded that the plaintiff's use was justified, and the plaintiff's request to confirm that the defendant's right to exclusive use of the registered trademark was not infringed was justified. The defendant argued that the reason for the plaintiff's infringement was not valid.

The reason why the prosecution was founded is that the reporter noticed that one of the peculiarities of the case is that the plaintiff initiated the affirmation of the non infringement lawsuit, while in the general intellectual property case, the plaintiff mostly asked to confirm that the defendant constituted an infringement and was held responsible accordingly.

So, is the lawsuit brought by YOUNGOR group in line with the law?

YOUNGOR group's explanation is that the defendant Li Mou warned the plaintiff in a lawyer's letter, and disclosed to the media that he had sued the plaintiff. He expressed his opinion that the plaintiff had infringed his exclusive right to use the registered trademark and demanded compensation, which enabled the plaintiff to continue to use the "DP" logo in an uncertain state.

To this end, the plaintiff initiated the judicial process to solve this dispute.

This reason of YOUNGOR group has been approved by the court. The statement of the judgment is that the defendant asserted his right through legal means of complaint to the industrial and commercial administrative organs. However, after being sold by the industrial and commercial administrative organs, the defendant did not continue to initiate judicial proceedings to settle disputes.

Due to the lack of support for judicial decisions with res judicata, the defendant insisted in the trial of the case that the plaintiff constituted an infringement, and whether the plaintiff could continue to use the "DP" logo is still in an uncertain state, so the plaintiff initiatively affirms that the non infringement litigation is in line with the conditions for prosecution.

Yang Jing: editor in charge