Unfair competition is a violation and infringement of fair competition. Fair competition refers to the behavior of operators using business methods to compete in compliance with national laws, abiding by socially recognized business ethics, and adhering to the principles of good faith. . The following are classic unfair competition cases that I have compiled for you. Welcome to read!
Classic Unfair Competition Cases 1
In December 2007, by Beijing Shui Yisheng After the patented product "Shuiyisheng" micro-electrolytic water generator developed and produced by Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd. was put on the market on a large scale, it carried out a lot of advertising, won various awards and honors many times, and has a high reputation in society.
Since June 2008, a similar product called "Shui Yisheng Super Nano Active Water Cup" has appeared on the market. The pronunciation of the product name is exactly the same as that of Shui Yisheng Company's products. The packaging and decoration Also very similar. Therefore, Beijing Shuiyisheng Company believes that Nanning Boai Pharmacy, the manufacturer of "Shuiyisheng" products, Nanjing Xiongfei Biotechnology Co., Ltd., and the seller Lei Honghong, have disrupted the market order and violated the principles of voluntariness, equality, and good faith. It affected the business reputation of Beijing Shuiyisheng Company and was an act of unfair competition. Nanjing Xiongfei Biotechnology Co., Ltd. and Lei Honghong were taken to court.
The High Court of the Autonomous Region held that Nanjing Xiongfei Biotechnology Co., Ltd. used the unique packaging and decoration of Beijing Shuiyisheng Company’s well-known products on the same products without the permission of Beijing Shuiyisheng Company. The behavior constituted unfair competition. The court ruled that Nanjing Xiongfei Biotechnology Co., Ltd. should compensate Shui Yisheng Company for economic losses of 450,000 yuan, and compensate Shui Yisheng Company for 50,000 yuan in expenses incurred in stopping the infringement. At the same time, it should publish a declaration in nationally distributed newspapers and periodicals to eliminate the impact; upon the judgment taking effect, Immediately destroy all packaging and decoration of super nano active water cups that are similar to the packaging and decoration of the micro-electrolysis water generator produced by Beijing Shuiyisheng Company, and stop the production and sales of packaging and decoration that are similar to the packaging and decoration of micro-electrolysis water generators produced by Beijing Shuiyisheng Company. Super nano active water cup with similar packaging and decoration.
Classic Unfair Competition Case 2
A website under the banner of "Wanjia Lighting" specializes in advertising for merchants in Wanjia Lighting Decoration City. For this reason, Beijing Wanjia Denghuo Home Decoration Market Co., Ltd. sued the website and claimed damages of 5 million yuan. Yesterday, the 31st, the Haidian Court determined that the website constituted unfair competition and awarded a compensation of 20,000 yuan based on the actual situation.
Wanjia Lighting Decoration Company said that they have a website called "Wanjia Lighting" dedicated to advertising the company's merchants. At the beginning of this year, the website operated by Beijing Zhongshang.com E-Commerce Technology Co., Ltd. was also named "Wanjia Lighting". The "company address" displayed on the website was the same as the business address of Wanjia Lighting Decoration Company, and the merchants advertised on the website They are also our merchants. Wanjia Lighting Decoration Company believed that the defendant's website impersonated itself and advertised for merchants for a fee, which constituted unfair competition. It requested the court to order the website to be delisted and to compensate for losses of 5 million yuan.
Classic unfair competition cases 3
In the spring of 1996, the Beijing Fangshan District Industry and Commerce Bureau, based on complaints from Beijing Niulanshan Distillery, launched a lawsuit against Beijing Lugouqiao Distillery for counterfeiting Beijing Niulanshan Distillery. The unique name, packaging and decoration behavior of Huadeng brand Beijing wine, a well-known product of Lanshan Winery, were investigated.
After investigation, Huadeng brand Beijing Chun Liquor is a high-quality product produced by Beijing Niulanshan Distillery and is a famous product in Beijing. In order to develop and develop "Beijing Chun", Beijing Niulanshan Distillery has invested a total of 80 million yuan in research and development and advertising expenses since 1992, resulting in a rapid increase in market share. However, since October 1995, counterfeit products with the unique name, packaging and decoration of "Beijing Chun" have appeared on the market. Among them, the trade names of Good Brand and Lugouqiao Brand Beijing Chun Liquor produced by Beijing Lugouqiao Distillery are the same as the Huadeng brand Beijing Liquor produced by Beijing Niulanshan Distillery, and the packaging and decoration are similar enough to cause confusion among consumers. Misidentification.
After investigation, from April 1995 to June 1996, Beijing Lugouqiao Liquor produced 52,174 bottles of Gude brand and Lugouqiao brand Beijing Chun Liquor, and printed 68,000 sets of packaging boxes with the words "Beijing Chun" on them, which have been sold. 47,436 bottles.
Based on the above facts, the Fangshan District Industrial and Commercial Bureau determined that the above-mentioned behavior of Beijing Lugouqiao Distillery violated Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, which prohibits "the unauthorized use of the unique names and packaging of well-known products" , decoration, or use names, packaging, decoration similar to those of well-known goods, causing confusion with other people's well-known goods, causing buyers to mistake them for the well-known goods." The company is ordered to stop producing Beijing Chunjiu and eliminate infringement on existing goods. product name and packaging.
Classic Unfair Competition Cases Chapter 4
Plaintiff Shanghai Equipment Co., Ltd.*** (hereinafter referred to as Shanghai Equipment Company***) and Defendant Foshan Shunde District Electrical Appliance Industrial Co., Ltd. ***Hereinafter referred to as an electrical appliance company in Shunde*** are companies that produce range hoods and other household appliances. A device company in Shanghai has registered a combination trademark of "multi-ring DUOHUAN" and graphics.
From August to September 2007, someone released an advertisement for the defendant's product in Jiangxi's "Huicong Commercial Advertisement" and released a "solemn declaration" at the bottom right of the product advertisement stating that the ×× series of oil fume purifiers were Patented products, many products such as "Kangjia" and "Shanghai Duohuan" appearing on the market are all counterfeit. It was later verified that the advertisement was seriously inaccurate. Information shows that the advertising publisher Liu is responsible for the product promotion and product sales of an electrical appliance company in Shunde in various regions of Jiangxi Province. After the second trial, the court determined that Liu's act of releasing the "solemn declaration" was an authorized act by the defendant. Both Liu and the defendant were at fault, and ordered both parties to jointly and severally pay civil liability of 150,000 yuan.