Supermarket Cashier Is Using Wechat Trademark To Sue For Infringement.

Since the registered trademark has been applied for cancellation for three consecutive years, can it bring a tort suit to the court during the period of trademark revocation review? Recently, the Nanjing railway pport court rejected the plaintiff's principal disqualification.

The A company of the plaintiff's Payment Service Co., Ltd. has obtained the right to use WeChat trademark approved by the State Trademark Office.

After that, A and the plaintiff signed the trademark licensing contract and WeChat trademark rights protection agreement, which authorized the plaintiff to protect the right to exclusive use of WeChat's registered trademark.

Later, the plaintiff found that a supermarket company was not registered.

People allowed to display high hanging signs in the exhibition hall of the mall, "welcome to use WeChat payment". They believed that the defendant used the same logo as the plaintiff WeChat registered trademark in the same business, which constituted his own infringement.

The defendant argued that the trademark involved was not used in a real and effective manner, and that the trademark was not necessary to protect it. Moreover, the trademark concerned had been revoked by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and commerce. Although it is still under review, its source of right is obviously unstable.

The plaintiff himself has no interest in the trademark concerned, and has no right to sue.

In addition, the defendant is engaged in commercial retail, and its collection behavior does not belong to the "financial services" approved for the use of the trademark. The shop sign posted on the defendant's WeChat shop is not a trademark. It is not a trademark use. It requests to dismiss the plaintiff's prosecution.

The court held that the plaintiff could not become eligible.

。

The plaintiff in this case is not a registrant of the registered trademark of WeChat. Whether the plaintiff is qualified or not, he can not only rely on the authorization of litigation, but also examine whether he has a direct interest in the case.

The plaintiff obtains the right to use the registered trademark through the authorization of the trademark registrant, but the contract for the licensing between the plaintiff and the registrant is not reported to the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce for record and announcement, and the registered trademark was decided to be withdrawn by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce in July 22, 2016.

Although the registered trademark registrants concerned apply to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board within the prescribed time limit

The withdrawal decision has not yet come into effect, but the decision to withdraw is enough to cause the plaintiff's rights base to be markedly unstable.

According to the relevant laws and regulations, the relevant relief for the revocation of a registered trademark has clear legal guidelines, and the trademark registrant should continue to exercise litigation rights after his rights are stable.

The court ruled against the plaintiff's prosecution.

Registered trademark logo, as a significant mark of a person or an enterprise recognized by the state and protected by law, is generally composed of figures, characters, symbols, etc. as a whole, it shows the sole attribute and brand image of the product.

In practice, it is not possible to identify the number of registered trademarks infringed by a criminal mechanically by the number of graphs or words that are manufactured or altered. Instead, we should take the registered trademark as a whole, consider the object and object of the crime, and define the circumstances of the crime.

The official website of the Trademark Bureau of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce announced that in order to further standardize and do a good job in Trademark Review and trademark examination, promote the reform of trademark registration facilitation and enhance the level of public service of trademarks, the Trademark Office and the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board attached great importance to the revision of the Trademark Review and trial standards. After listening to the opinions of all parties and drawing on the standards of foreign examination, the Trademark Review and trial standards were revised based on years of Trademark Review and trial practice.

The revised trademark inspection and trial standard has been approved by the State Administration for Industry and commerce, and is hereby announced.

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats and Internet cafes.