| Guiding Case No. 58 of the Supreme People's Court: Chengdu Tongdefu Hechuan Peach Slices Co., Ltd. v. Chongqing Municipality Hechuan District Tongdefu Peach Slices Co., Ltd. and Yu Xiaohua (Case concerning dispute over infringement upon trademark right and unfair competition) | | 指导案例58号：成都同德福合川桃片有限公司诉重庆市合川区同德福桃片有限公司、余晓华侵害商标权及不正当竞争纠纷案 |
| (Issued on May 20, 2016 as deliberated and adopted by the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court) | | （最高人民法院审判委员会讨论通过 2016年5月20日发布） |
| Guiding Case No. 58 | | 指导案例58号 |
| Keywords | | 关键词 |
| civil; infringement upon trademark right; unfair competition; time-honored brand; false publicity | | 民事/侵害商标权/不正当竞争/老字号/虚假宣传 |
| Key Points of Judgment | | 裁判要点 |
| 1. Where an individual or enterprise without any historical origin of a “time-honored brand” registers the “time-honored brand” or trade name similar thereto as a trademark and publicizes his or its products by using the history of the “time-honored brand,” it shall be determined as false publicity and constitute unfair competition. | | 1.与“老字号”无历史渊源的个人或企业将“老字号”或与其近似的字号注册为商标后，以“老字号”的历史进行宣传的，应认定为虚假宣传，构成不正当竞争。 |
| 2. Where an individual or enterprise with historical origin of a “time-honored brand” registers the “time-honored brand” as the trade name or enterprise name of an individual industrial and commercial household under the premise of not violating the principle of good faith, and the individual or enterprise does not cause any confusing or highlight the use of such trade name, it does not constitute unfair competition or infringement upon the exclusive right to use a registered trademark. | | 2.与“老字号”具有历史渊源的个人或企业在未违反诚实信用原则的前提下，将“老字号”注册为个体工商户字号或企业名称，未引人误认且未突出使用该字号的，不构成不正当竞争或侵犯注册商标专用权。 |
| Legal Provisions | | 相关法条 |
| Item (7) of Article 57 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China | | 《中华人民共和国商标法》第57条第7项 |
| Articles 2 and 9 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China | | 《中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法》第2条、第9条 |
| Basic Facts | | 基本案情 |
| Plaintiff (defendant in the counterclaim) Chengdu Tongdefu Hechuan Peach Slices Food Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Chengdu Tongdefu Company”) alleged that: It was the owner of trademark “同德福TONGDEFU and Device.” The individual industrial and commercial household and Chongqing Municipality Hechuan District Tongdefu Peach Slices Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Chongqing Tongdefu Company”) successively established by Yu Xiaohua highlighted “Tongdefu” in the trade name and the outer packaging of peach slices they produced, which has infringed upon plaintiff's exclusive right to use the trademark “同德福TONGDEFU and Device” and constituted unfair competition. Therefore, plaintiff requested the court to order that Chongqing Tongdefu Company and Yu Xiaohua should cease the use and cancel the enterprise name with the trade name “Tongdefu”; cease the infringement upon plaintiff's exclusive right to use the trademark, extend a formal apology in the newspaper, eliminate the adverse effects, and compensate plaintiff 500,000 yuan for its economic and business reputation losses and other reasonable expenses of 5,066.4 yuan. | | 原告（反诉被告）成都同德福合川桃片食品有限公司（以下简称成都同德福公司）诉称，成都同德福公司为“同德福TONGDEFU及图”商标权人，余晓华先后成立的个体工商户和重庆市合川区同德福桃片有限公司（以下简称重庆同德福公司），在其字号及生产的桃片外包装上突出使用了“同德福”，侵害了原告享有的“同德福TONGDEFU及图”注册商标专用权并构成不正当竞争。请求法院判令重庆同德福公司、余晓华停止使用并注销含有“同德福”字号的企业名称；停止侵犯原告商标专用权的行为，登报赔礼道歉、消除影响，赔偿原告经济、商誉损失50万元及合理开支5066.4元。 |
Defendants (plaintiffs in the counterclaim) Chongqing Tongdefu Company and Yu Xiaohua co-responded in the defense and counterclaimed that the predecessor of Chongqing Tongdefu Company was Tongdefu Fast Shop originated in 1898. Although Tongdefu Fast Shop ceased production due to public-private partnership, the pass-on of the unique technique from generation to generation was not interrupted. Yu Xiaohua, the fourth-generation successor, inherited the ancestral property, successively registered an individual industrial and commercial household and a company, and used the enterprise name and trade name in a standardized manner. The registration of Chongqing Tongdefu Company and Yu Xiaohua was bona fide and did not constitute infringement. Chengdu Tongdefu Company had no direct historical origin with the time-honored brand “Tongdefu,” but it made associated publicity of the trademark “Tongdefu” and the trade name “Tongdefu,” which was false publicity. In addition, Chengdu Tongdefu Company used “Tongdefu,” name of a famous commodity without approval, which constituted unfair competition. Therefore, defendants requested the court to order that Chengdu Tongdefu Company should cease the false publicity and extend a formal apology in a national newspaper to eliminate adverse effects; and cease infringement upon “Tongdefu,” the specific name of a famous commodity.
．．．．．． | | 被告（反诉原告）重庆同德福公司、余晓华共同答辩并反诉称，重庆同德福公司的前身为始创于1898年的同德福斋铺，虽然同德福斋铺因公私合营而停止生产，但未中断独特技艺的代代相传。“同德福”第四代传人余晓华继承祖业先后注册了个体工商户和公司，规范使用其企业名称及字号，重庆同德福公司、余晓华的注册行为是善意的，不构成侵权。成都同德福公司与老字号“同德福”并没有直接的历史渊源，但其将“同德福”商标与老字号“同德福”进行关联的宣传，属于虚假宣传。而且，成都同德福公司擅自使用“同德福”知名商品名称，构成不正当竞争。请求法院判令成都同德福公司停止虚假宣传，在全国性报纸上登报消除影响；停止对“同德福”知名商品特有名称的侵权行为。
．．．．．． |
|
Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.
1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.
2. Binding to the account with access to this database.
3. Apply for a trial account.
4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【￥400.00】 for your single purchase. | |
您好：您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录，进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息；如您还不是我们 的英文用户；您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买，支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
|
| | | |
| | | |