Haidilaos lawsuit against hedilao infringement rejected Court: no misunderstanding

category:Hot
 Haidilaos lawsuit against hedilao infringement rejected Court: no misunderstanding


Information map

Hedilao restaurant was approved and registered on September 20, 2018. Its business scope is Chinese food service. Its business address is at the west end of the second floor, 105 Renmin Road, Yuhua District, Changsha City, Hunan Province. The billboard above the front door of hedilao restaurant is hedilao home cooked dishes. The publicity sign on the right side of the front door is hedilao, go to hedilao after eating Dongting fresh fish, and the wooden sign at the front door is hedilao good taste There are six words for Dao. Among them, hedilao as a whole is in the form of artistic characters, of which the three points of water in the word River present the artistic form of river, and the points under the word bottom are replaced by a fish shaped image. And theres an image of a fish on top of the sign.

Information map

Haidilao thinks that hedilao restaurant uses hedilao logo on the plaque and service supplies of its hotel without authorization, and uses hedilao brand name in the enterprise name. The hedilao logo used by hedilao restaurant is similar to the Haidilao trademark approved and registered by Haidilao company. The use of hedilao trademark by hedilao restaurant in its business premises is a typical trademark use behavior in hotel service industry, which constitutes the use of similar trademark in the same service, which infringes the exclusive right of Haidilao trademark of Haidilao company.

Therefore, Haidilao was sued to Tianxin District Peoples Court of Changsha.

The defendant, hedilao restaurant, argued that:

Second, from the perspective of the services and catering products provided by both sides, the only thing they have in common is catering. Haidilao hotpot has a high social awareness. Everyone who knows Haidilao hotpot knows that Haidilao is for Sichuan cuisine and hotpot. Hedilao restaurant is mainly engaged in the river fresh of Hunan cuisine series. We also have hotpot, but hotpot is not our main business. We mainly deal in Hunan cuisine. The two are quite different in terms of the series of dishes and the way of providing services.

Information map

After hearing the case, the court of Tianxin District of Changsha City held that the plaintiff Haidilao company proposed that the hedilao logo used by the defendant hedilao restaurant was similar to the Haidilao trademark approved and registered. However, according to the second paragraph of Article 9 of the interpretation of the Supreme Peoples Court on several issues concerning the application of law in the trial of civil disputes over trademarks, Article 52 (1) of the trademark law is stipulated The trademark similarity refers to the trademark accused of infringement is similar to the plaintiffs registered trademark in terms of font shape, pronunciation, meaning, composition and color of graphics, or the overall structure after the combination of its elements, or its three-dimensional shape and color combination are similar, which may cause the relevant public to misunderstand the origin of the goods or think that its source is the same as that of the plaintiffs registered trademark Products have a specific connection. In terms of word trademark, whether it is similar or not needs to be comprehensively identified in terms of sound, shape and meaning.

First of all, although both the hedilao logo and the Haidilao trademark have the word Dilao, there are still some differences in the overall font of the characters. The plaintiff Haidilao companys registered trademark Haidilao is Fangzheng Huali typeface, and the hedilao logo is composed of artistic characters, and the River character three-point water part is the artistic form of the river The dot below the character bottom is made up of the image of an artistic fish. In terms of pronunciation, although the Pinyin of he and Hai begin with H, there is no similarity between the two in terms of pronunciation, whether in accordance with Putonghua pronunciation or Hunan local dialect pronunciation. There is no similarity in composition and color between hedilao restaurant and Haidilao hotpot shop. And the overall structure, three-dimensional shape and color combination have no similarity.

Therefore, no matter from the font shape, pronunciation, composition and color, or from the dishes operated by the plaintiff and the defendant, the general consumers will not misunderstand the source of hedilaos catering service, or think that there is a special connection between the source and the plaintiffs registered trademark Haidilao. Therefore, the defendants hedilao restaurant does not constitute the registered trademark of the plaintiff Haidilao company Dilao trademark infringement.

The peoples Court of Tianxin District of Changsha City rejected the plaintiffs claim of Sichuan Haidilao catering Co., Ltd. After the judgment of the first instance, neither the plaintiff nor the defendant appealed.

Peng Dingyun, President of the intellectual property court of the Tianxin District Peoples Court of Changsha City, who presided over the case, believes that rights need to be protected but should not be abused. In judicial adjudication, whether based on law or national intellectual property strategy, intellectual property rights need to be strictly protected in order to promote social innovation.

However, it is undeniable that in the field of trademark rights and copyright, there are some batch commercial rights protection, focusing on the interests of small shop operators, and not concerned about tracing the source of anti-counterfeiting. Some even abuse their rights to monopolize certain industries and fields, which is contrary to the purpose of protecting intellectual property rights to promote social innovation.

(function(){( window.slotbydup=window .slotbydup||[]).push({id:u5811557,container:ssp_ 5811557, async:true }Li Kui meets Li Gui? Haidilao sued hedilao for trademark infringement, which was rejected by the court in the first instance: there will be no misunderstanding. Source: Legal weekend paper author: Fang Gu responsible editor: Li Tianyi_ NN7528