Case: American W Company came to Beijing to invest in the restaurant industry in 1986, and its restaurants have 2 chain stores, all of which use the name "California Beef Noodle King". The signboard of this name is hung outside the restaurant with three colors of "red, blue and white". Beijing y restaurant opened in 1993, and its banner plaque also used the name of "California beef noodle king", but its plaque was decorated with three colors: "red, white and blue". In 1994, W Company filed a lawsuit against Y Restaurant, demanding that Y Restaurant bear the legal responsibility for unfair competition. Y restaurant's defense on the grounds that the name of "California Beef Noodle King" was approved by W Company and the decorative colors of "red, blue, white" and "red, white and blue" were different did not constitute infringement.

the court held through trial that the restaurant "California Beef Noodle King" operated by W Company and its beef noodles have enjoyed popularity among local consumers, and beef noodles can be recognized as "well-known commodities". Restaurant Y argues that Company W authorized it to use the name of California Beef Noodle King and the decoration of "red, blue and white", and it should be considered as unauthorized use by Restaurant Y because of insufficient evidence. " Although the red, blue and white decorations and the red, white and blue decorations are different in color order, they are enough to confuse consumers, so the behavior of Y restaurant has constituted unfair competition. The court ruled:

1. Restaurant Y immediately stopped using the name "California Beef Noodle King";

2. y restaurant will pay w company 8, yuan for loss of goodwill and 16, yuan for legal fees within 1 days, totaling 96, yuan;

3. Restaurant Y published a statement in the local newspaper apologizing to Company W for its behavior.

the unfair competition behavior of commodity subject confusion is a kind of unfair competition behavior of commodity confusion. Commodity confusion behavior includes three situations: commodity subject, business subject and commodity quality confusion. The above case is the case of confusion of commodity subjects.

Paragraph 2 of Article 5 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law stipulates that it is unfair competition to "use the unique name, packaging and decoration of a well-known commodity without authorization, or use the name, packaging and decoration similar to a well-known commodity, causing confusion with other people's well-known commodities, and making buyers mistake it for the well-known commodity". The confusion of commodity subjects stipulated in the examination law mainly refers to two situations: one is counterfeiting the registered trademark of others on the commodity or its packaging; Second, unauthorized use of the unique name, packaging and decoration of other people's well-known goods or names, packaging and decoration similar to well-known goods, resulting in confusion with other people's well-known goods and misleading consumers to buy their own goods. The improper behavior in this case belongs to the second case of confusion of commodity subjects. An important condition for this behavior is that the goods that use other people's commodity names, decorations, etc. without authorization must be well-known goods. According to the laws of China, well-known commodities refer to commodities that have a certain popularity in the market and are known to the relevant public. It does not require a commodity to be known to the whole society, but to enjoy popularity among consumers related to the commodity. For example, "California Beef Noodle King" has 2 chain stores, which are well-known among beef noodle consumers and belong to well-known commodities. The unfair competition behavior of commodity subject confusion has caused damage to the business reputation and economic interests of the injured operators and the rights and interests of consumers, which has seriously violated the principles of fairness, honesty and credibility in civil law and should be punished by law.

according to the provisions of the anti-unfair competition law, if an operator's behavior constitutes unfair competition, he shall bear civil liability for infringement. Its main forms of civil liability are: stop the infringement; Apologize; Compensate for the loss. Generally, the civil liability to stop the infringement should be executed immediately or within a time limit after the court decision takes effect. Apologize can be made orally to the victim in court, and the judge can also order the infringer to apologize publicly in the local newspaper. Compensation for losses in exams is the most important and commonly used form of civil liability, and compensation for losses is mainly limited to the property losses actually suffered by the victims. When determining the scope of compensation for W company's losses, the judge in this case considered the company's loss of goodwill and part of the lawyer's fees for the lawsuit, which is in contrast to other types of civil cases that generally do not compensate the lawyer's fees, which is beneficial to protecting the rights and interests of the victims.