On April 22, the China Supreme Court released the 2023 Top 10 IP Cases and 50 Typical IP Cases. Among these cases, those involving trademark infringement and unfair competition are as follows:
1. The "Siemens in Chinese" trademark infringement and unfair competition disputes
SIEMENS AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT and Siemens (China) Co., Ltd. ("Siemens") are the rights holders of the "Siemens in Chinese" and "SIEMENS" trademarks. The two trademarks are registered on washing machines and other goods. After long-term use and vigorous promotion by Siemens, these two trademarks have obtained high reputation. Ningbo Qimou Electric Co., Ltd. ("Qimou") and others registered the name "Shanghai Siemens Electric Co., Ltd." overseas and extensively used it as a commercial logo on the washing machine products, packaging, and related promotional activities. Siemens claimed that the acts of Qimou and others infringed on its registered trademark rights and constituted unfair competition. The first instance court found that the alleged infringement by Qimou and others did not constitute trademark infringement, but constituted unfair competition. The court held that Qimou and others should immediately stop the infringement and compensate for economic losses of RMB 100 million (USD 138 million) and reasonable expenses of RMB 163,000 (USD 22,500). Qimou appealed. In the second instance, the China Supreme Court found that Qimou and others knew the popularity of the "Siemens in Chinese" and "SIEMENS" trademarks and deliberately used "Shanghai Siemens Electric Co., Ltd." on washing machine products, causing confusion among consumers and constituted trademark infringement. The use of this logo on packaging and promotional activities also constituted unfair competition. QImou shall bear liability for compensation. Regarding the amount of compensation, although it was difficult to determine Siemens' actual losses or Qimou's infringement profits from the evidence, it was sufficient to determine that Qimou's infringement profits have clearly exceeded the maximum statutory compensation of RMB 5 million. Given that Qimou refused to provide financial information related to the infringement, which has constituted evidence impediment, the first instance court referenced to media reports that Qimou's annual sales totaled RMB 1.5 billion (USD 207 million), and based on the relevant facts of the case that the sales ratio of the accused infringing products was one-fifteenth in determining the compensation to be RMB 100 million was not wrong. The China Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the original judgment.
2. The "Lafite in Chinese" trademark infringement and unfair competition disputes
Chateau Lafite Rothschild ("Rothschild") is the right holder of the "LAFITE" trademark and the "CHATEAU LAFITE ROTHSCHILD" trademark (collectively as "Cited Marks"). The Cited Marks are registered on alcoholic beverage goods. The Cited Marks obtained high reputation after long-term use. "LAFITE" and "Lafite in Chinese" have established a solid association. On April 1, 2005, Nanjing Jin Mou Wine Co., Ltd. ("Jin Mou") filed for the "Lafite Chateau in Chinese" mark on wine and other goods. Since then, Jin Mou and others have used labels such as "Lafite Manor in Chinese" and "LAFEI MANOR" in the process of producing, importing, and selling wine, and promoted them on their websites and transaction documents. On December 23, 2016, the China Supreme Court made a retrial judgment and supported the CNIPA's canceling of Jin Mou's "Lafite Chateau in Chinese" trademark. Rothschild then sued seven defendants including Jin Mou to the court. The first instance court found that the seven defendants' acts constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition, and ordered them to stop infringement and applied punitive damages. Jin Mou and others appealed. In the second instance, the China Supreme Court found that Jin Mou and others had bad faith intention to take advantage of the Cited Marks when applying for registration and using the "Chateau Lafite in Chinese" trademark, and they failed to show good faith and trustworthy interests in using the said mark. Their use of "Chateau Lafite in Chinese," and "LAFEI MANOR" logo constituted trademark infringement, and exaggerating the historical heritage and popularity of the "Lafite Manor in Chinese" wine in publicity constituted false publication. Jin Mou and others obviously acted in bad faith and the infringement was serious. According to Rothschild's request, punitive damages were applied against Jin Mou and others, and a total of RMB 79.17 million (USD 10.9 million) compensation in economic losses and reasonable expenses were ordered.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.