中文/English

Supreme Law issued in 2016 10 top 10 large intellectual property cases of Rafi "and" Laifei manor "trademark administrative case

2017-4-26 23:07| Announcer: admin

Rafael Rothschild Chateau and the State Administration for Industry and Commerce Trademark Review and Adjudication Board, Nanjing Golden Hope Wine Co., Ltd. Trademark Dispute Administrative Dispute Reconsideration[Supreme People's Court (2016) Supreme People's Court and Administrative Judgment 34)

 

Case Summary:No. 4578349 "Lafite Manor" trademark (that is, the trademark) of the filing date of April 1, 2005, approved the use of 33 categories of wine, wine (drinks) and other commodities, the registered person for the Nanjing Golden Hope Wine Co., Ltd. (Hereinafter referred to as the hope that the company). "LAFITE" trademark (ie, cited trademark) Application date is October 10, 1996, approved in the 33rd category of alcoholic beverages (excluding beer) goods, the registered person for the Rafi Rothschild Chateau (hereinafter referred to as pull The winery). Lafite winery for the disputed trademark to the State Administration for Industry and Commerce Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (hereinafter referred to as the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board) to apply for a dispute. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to make a comment [2013] No. 55856 "on No. 4578349" Lafite Manor "trademark dispute ruling" (referred to as the 55856 ruling), the registration of the disputed trademark to be revoked. Gold hope the company refused to accept administrative litigation. Beijing First Intermediate People's Court that through the relevant media, combined with Lafite winery "LAFITE" wine as early as before the date of registration of the disputed trademark to enter the Chinese market situation, the relevant domestic public to understand the "LAFITE" call For "Rafael", "Rafiite" or "Rafi", and has a high reputation. The registration of the disputed trademark violates the provisions of Article 28 of the Trademark Law of 2001, and the judgment holds the determination of No. 55856. Gold hope the company refused to accept the appeal. Beijing Higher People's Court of second instance that it is difficult to identify the trademark before the filing date, the citation mark has been in the Chinese mainland market visibility, the relevant public has been able to cite the trademark and "Rafi" corresponding identification. The registration and use of the disputed trademark for up to ten years, from the maintenance has been formed and stable market order to consider, the case of the registration of disputes should be maintained, the verdict of the first instance verdict and the decision 55856. Lafite winery refused to apply to the Supreme People 's Court for retrial. The Supreme People 's Court ruled that the case was submitted and the retrial was made on December 23, 2016, the second instance verdict was abolished and the judgment of first instance and decision 55856 were maintained.

 

Typical meaning:This case deals with the judgment of the similarity between Chinese and English trademarks and whether there is a stable market order. The Supreme People's Court that the case cited trademark has a high reputation, Lafite winery through years of business activities, objectively in the "Rafi" and "LAFITE" established a strong link between, so Disputed Trademarks and Citation Trademarks constitute an approximate trademark used on the same similar goods, violating the provisions of Article 28 of the Trademark Law. In addition, for a trademark that has been registered for a period of time, whether the mark has been determined by the use of a higher market reputation and the formation of its own relevant public group, is not determined by the use of a long time single factor, but whether it is objectively available Behavior makes it relevant for the public to distinguish it from the relevant mark, and whether it is likely to lead to confusion as a criterion of judgment, this case does not exist in this case. The similarity degree of the trademark and the similarity degree of the relevant trademark, the identification of the relevant trademark and the recognition of the corresponding relationship between the relevant public groups and so on. On this basis, it clarifies the referee standard of the similarity judgment of the Chinese and English trademarks , Has a very important guiding significance.

Address: 5/F, Tower A, GT International Center, Jia 3 Yongandongli, Jianguomenwai Ave, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022, China
Tel:+86-10-5879 3300Fax:+86-10-5879 3311Email: mail@boss-young.cn
返回顶部