Xiaofangniu lost the lawsuit and was ordered to pay Haidilao 950,000
Xiaofangniu lost the lawsuit and was ordered to pay Haidilao 950,000 because it was believed that the Hebei Xiaofangniu Company had violated its restaurant decoration and WeChat account The use of the words "Haidilao in the cooking industry" in the public account constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition. Sichuan Haidilao Company sued Hebei Xiaofangniu Company to the court. Xiao Shengniu lost the lawsuit and was ordered to pay Haidilao 950,000 yuan. Xiao Sheng Niu lost the lawsuit and was ordered to pay Haidilao RMB 950,001.
On May 13, the Beijing Higher People’s Court’s WeChat official account “Beijingfawangshi” tweeted “Haidilao sued Xiao Sheng Niu” "Judgment on Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition Case".
According to the tweet, Sichuan Haidilao Company believes that the defendant Hebei Xiaofangniu Company’s use of the words “Haidilao in the cooking world” in its restaurant decorations and WeChat official accounts constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition. Hebei Small Cattle Company was sued to court.
Recently, the Beijing Dongcheng Court pronounced its verdict on the case, ruling that Hebei Xiaofangniu Company should stop the use of the product involved in the case, publicly eliminate the impact, and compensate Sichuan Haidilao Company for economic losses and litigation expenses of 950,000 yuan. After the verdict of the case was pronounced, the plaintiff and defendant did not file an appeal, and the case is now in effect.
Previously, Hebei Xiaofangniu Company argued that the dishes sold by the plaintiff and defendant were different and did not belong to the same or similar services and goods, and there was no competitive relationship; the use of seabed The word "Lao" is a description of high quality and does not constitute trademark use, nor will it confuse or mislead consumers.
After a legal hearing, the Dongcheng Court held that the accused logos were prominently marked on posters, menus, tableware, employee clothing, etc., and the word "Haidilao" was often highlighted, and because "Haidilao" The trademark "Haidilao" is well-known, and consumers are more likely to focus on these three characters. Without detailed identification, some consumers will be attracted by the word "Haidilao".
At the same time, since "Haidilao" is a well-known catering service trademark, and "stir-fried vegetables" obviously belongs to the category of catering services, this sentence can also be easily understood as "Haidilao" "The stir-fry catering services operated by the trademark owner may have specific connections, which exceeds the scope of simple description.
In the end, the court ordered the defendant Hebei Xiaofangniu Company to immediately stop using the "Haidilao" logo. In view of the high popularity of the plaintiff's trademark involved, the defendant continued to use a large number of trademarks after the plaintiff sent two lawyer's letters. The store continued to use the logo involved in the case. The court awarded the plaintiff Sichuan Haidilao Company full compensation for the economic loss of 900,000 yuan claimed, and awarded it discretionary compensation for its reasonable expenses of 50,000 yuan. It also ordered the defendant to publish a statement in the "Rule of Law Daily" to represent the plaintiff. Eliminate the impact. Xiaofangniu lost the lawsuit and was ordered to pay Haidilao RMB 950,000 2
On May 13, according to news released by the Beijing Higher People’s Court’s WeChat public account “Beijingfawangshi”, Haidilao sued Xiaofangniu over the trademark The infringement and unfair competition case has been pronounced. The Beijing Dongcheng Court ruled that Hebei Xiaofangniu Company should stop the use of the product involved in the case, publicly eliminate the impact, and compensate Haidilao Company for economic losses and litigation expenses of 950,000 yuan. Haidilao said in an interview with a Beijing News reporter that the compensation will be used for assistance programs related to intellectual property protection for catering companies.
Because Hebei Xiaofangniu Company’s use of the words “Haidilao in the cooking world” in its restaurant decorations and WeChat official accounts constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition, Sichuan Haidilao The company took Hebei Small Cattle Company to court. On May 13, "Jingfa Net Affairs" showed that the Beijing Dongcheng Court pronounced its verdict on the case, ruling that Hebei Xiaofangniu Company should stop the use of the product involved in the case, publicly eliminate the impact, and compensate Haidilao Company for economic losses and litigation expenses of 950,000 yuan. After the verdict of the case was pronounced, the plaintiff and defendant did not file an appeal, and the case is now in effect.
In response to this matter, Haidilao responded to the Beijing News reporter saying that the court’s fair judgment effectively safeguarded the company’s legitimate rights and interests. At the same time, the judgment also highlights the firm attitude of my country's judicial institutions and relevant departments to strengthen intellectual property protection and create a good business environment.
In order to promote the improvement of intellectual property awareness in the catering industry and implement the effect of brand intellectual property protection, Haidilao decided to cooperate with the agency Chaocheng Law Firm to use the compensation awarded by the court for the "Ten Hundred Thousand Assistance Plan for Intellectual Property Protection of Catering Enterprises".
Haidilao introduced that the plan will provide 10 medium-sized catering companies with diagnostic reports on trademark protection status and optimization suggestions, and provide 200 small and micro and entrepreneurial catering companies with 200 We provide trademark registration agency assistance, provide 300 small and micro or entrepreneurial catering companies with free consultation and assistance from professional intellectual property lawyers, and provide 1,000 catering companies with special training assistance for intellectual property enterprises. Xiaofangniu lost the lawsuit and was ordered to pay Haidilao RMB 953,000.
Because some stores promoted it as "Haidilao in the cooking industry", Hebei Xiaofangniu Catering Management Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Xiaofangniu") Sichuan Haidilao Catering Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Haidilao") took it to court and claimed 1 million yuan.
According to the Beijing Higher People’s Court’s WeChat account “Beijingfa Net Affairs”, the Beijing Dongcheng Court recently pronounced its verdict on the case, ruling that Xiaofangniu should stop the use of the products involved, publicly eliminate the impact and compensate Haidilao for its economic losses. and litigation expenses of 950,000 yuan.
After the verdict of the case was announced, the plaintiff and defendant did not file an appeal, and the case is now in effect.
Promoted as “Haidilao in the stir-fry world”
Haidilao was sued to court
According to previous reports from Mijing.com, Public information shows that Hebei Xiaofangniu Catering Management Co., Ltd. was founded in 1991. It was formerly known as Beidou Star Restaurant in the ancient city of Baoding. It is a Hebei cuisine brand. Currently, it has 30 directly operated branches in Shijiazhuang, Baoding, Tangshan, Handan and Cangzhou cities in Hebei Province, with more than 1,400 employees, a total operating area of ??14,000 square meters, and 6 million diners per year. It has been rated as one of the "Top Ten" by the Chinese Cuisine Association "Chinese Specialty Restaurant" is a popular catering brand in Hebei Province.
In February 2021, Xiaofangniu opened its first store in Beijing in Beijing’s Tongzhou Wanda Shopping Mall. However, the store’s posters, menus, seat plates and many other decorations, as well as the official WeChat public account and online self-service The "Haidilao of the stir-fry world" logo has been used many times in media and other promotional activities.
On the Dianping platform, Xiaofangniu located in Tongzhou, Beijing, is ranked "No. 2 on the Xinhua Street Food Hot List". The store display picture not only has the name "Xiaofangniu", but also "Cooking World" Fishing from the sea” slogan.
Among the photos in the customer comments at the bottom, there are indeed photos showing that the store is promoted as "Haidilao in the cooking world."
Image source: Dianping.com
In this regard, Haidilao believes that the word "Haidilao" was used by Xiao Shengniu in the promotion process. The words are exactly the same as Haidilao's registered trademark, which constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition. At the same time, Xiaofangniu improperly uses Haidilao's brand and business advantages for commercial promotion, which also constitutes false publicity. So take it to court.
According to the indictment, Haidilao requested the court to order Xiaofangniu to compensate for economic losses and reasonable expenses of RMB 1 million to stop the infringement, and to disclose it in its operating stores, official WeChat public account, and the United States. Tuan, Ele.me and well-known newspapers and periodicals in the city where the stores are located shall publish statements in prominent positions for at least 30 days to eliminate the impact of their infringements.
"In response to Haidilao's complaint, the defendant Xiaofangniu argued that the defendant has always regarded the plaintiff as a role model, and this expression was extracted from customers' comments. The use of this word is to express respect and learning from the plaintiff. rather than clinging to the plaintiff; the dishes sold by the plaintiff and the defendant are different and do not belong to the same or similar services and goods, and there is no competitive relationship; the use of the word Haidilao is a description of high quality and does not constitute trademark use, nor does it It will confuse and mislead consumers.
At the same time, the defendant has a high reputation in the local area and does not need to adhere to the Haidilao brand that is different from its own dishes. This method of use does not disparage the reputation of the plaintiff, but plays a positive publicity role and is not unfair. compete.
After hearing the case in accordance with the law, the Dongcheng Court held that the trademarks involved in the case for which the plaintiff claimed rights were within the validity period of registration, and the plaintiff’s exclusive right to register the trademark should be protected by law. The evidence in the case shows that the plaintiff's business has developed rapidly and has a large scale of operation. The trademark involved has been widely used in a large number of stores around the world. The trademark involved has a high market reputation and the law should provide it with corresponding protection.
In this case, although the plaintiff and the defendant were mainly engaged in hot pot and stir-fry respectively, they were both restaurants and restaurant services authorized to use the trademark involved. The defendant used "Haidilao in the stir-fry industry" "The logo also completely contains the word "Haidilao", which is similar to the trademark involved. Therefore, whether the defendant constitutes trademark infringement depends on whether the use is a trademark and whether it is likely to cause confusion.
First of all, judging from the way the accused logos are marked, the accused logos are all prominently marked on posters, menus, tableware, employee clothing, etc., and the three characters "Haidilao" are often highlighted. , and because the "Haidilao" trademark is well-known, consumers are more likely to focus on these three characters. Without detailed identification, some consumers will be attracted by the words "Haidilao".
Secondly, judging from the sentence structure of the accused logo, there is no evidence to prove that this popular sentence combination, including the "Haidilao of the stir-fry world" in this case, has become a standardized and stable popular expression in Chinese. , for the relevant public of different age groups, knowledge structures, and language habits, it can only express a unique fixed meaning;
Especially in the case of "Haidilao" is a well-known catering service trademark, while "stir-fried vegetables" obviously belongs to catering services In the context of the scope, this sentence can also be easily understood as the stir-fry catering service operated by the owner of the "Haidilao" trademark, or there may be a specific connection, which goes beyond the scope of a simple description.
Thirdly, from the perspective of the defendant’s subjective state of using the accused logo and the balance of interests, the defendant has prominently placed it on posters, menus, napkins, water cups, handbags, employee clothing, etc. in its more than 20 stores. Almost all of them were marked with the logos involved in the case, and they continued to use them after the plaintiff sent two warning letters, which is hardly good faith. The defendant directly used the same words as the core content of the right trademark on the same service. If things go on like this, it will also weaken the relationship between the right trademark and the right trademark. The only corresponding relationship between trademark owners has caused chaos in the market.
Therefore, the defendant’s use of the accused logo has exceeded the scope of descriptive fair use and belongs to trademark use, which constitutes an infringement of the plaintiff’s exclusive right to register a trademark. Since the court has determined that the alleged use is an infringement of trademark rights and the plaintiff's rights and interests have received corresponding relief, it will no longer identify and comment on whether it is an act of unfair competition.
In summary, the court ordered the defendant Xiaofangniu to immediately stop using the "Haidilao" logo in connection with the case. In view of the high popularity of the plaintiff's trademark involved, the defendant was still in a large number of stores after the plaintiff sent two legal letters. Due to the continued use of the logo involved in the case, the court awarded the plaintiff Haidilao full compensation for the economic loss of 900,000 yuan claimed, and awarded it discretionary compensation for its reasonable expenses of 50,000 yuan. It also ordered the defendant to publish a statement in the Rule of Law Daily to eliminate the impact on the plaintiff.
Haidilao stated that it will join forces with the agency Chaocheng Law Firm to use the compensation awarded by the court for the "Ten Hundred Thousand Assistance Plan for Intellectual Property Protection of Catering Enterprises."