The Guangdong Provincial Higher People's Court made a second-instance judgment on the "New Balance" trademark dispute case. The court ordered New Balance to immediately stop infringing Zhou Lelun's registered trademark rights of "Bailun" and "New Balance" and to compensate Zhou Lelun 5 million yuan. , New Balance needs to publish a statement on the homepage of its "New Balance (China) official website", "New Balance flagship store", and "new balance children's shoes flagship store" to eliminate the impact.
Foreign brands entered the domestic market and were sued
On April 15, 1983, the American company "New Balance" was approved to register "N" and "N" in Category 54 "Shoes" NB" trademark, and was approved to register the "NEW BALANCE" trademark in Class 25 "Shoes" on April 15, 2003. New Balance was established in December 2006, and "New Balance" authorized New Balance to use the above trademarks in China starting from November 1, 2007. New Balance has so far opened a "New Balance Official Flagship Store" on "Tmall Mall", and the official website uses the words "New Balance (China) Official Website" and "New Balance New Balance". With the brand's market expansion, "New Balance NEW BLANCE" products have become familiar to more and more Chinese consumers, but some people have taken New Balance to court.
On July 15, 2013, Zhou Lolun filed a lawsuit with the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court on the grounds that New Balance had infringed upon his exclusive right to register the trademarks "Balun" and "New Balance", requesting an order to order the defendant to stop infringement. , a compensation of 98 million yuan. The court of first instance found that Chaoyang Shoes and Hats Company was allowed to register the "Bailun" trademark in August 1996, and the "Bailun" trademark was born. The trademark was transferred to Zhou Lelun in April 2004. In June 2004, Zhou Lelun applied to register the "New Balance" trademark. In January 2008, the trademark was approved for use on products including "shoes (footwear)". Zhou Lulun provided multiple pieces of evidence to prove that he actually used the "Bailun" and "New Balance" trademarks.
The court of first instance held that Zhou Lolun's registered trademarks of "Bailun" and "New Balance" are legal and valid, and his exclusive right to register trademarks should be protected by law. New Balance Company uses the "New Balance" logo that is the same as or similar to Zhou Lelun's "Balun" and "New Balance" registered trademarks on similar goods, causing confusion among the relevant public and infringing on Zhou Lelun's registered trademark exclusive rights. It should be responsible for stopping the infringement and paying economic compensation. Liability for losses, elimination of impacts, etc.
The defendant in the first trial appealed against the compensation of nearly 100 million yuan
The court of first instance held that Zhou Lolun clearly determined the amount of compensation based on New Balance's infringement profits. According to the evidence preserved by the court, New Balance The company's profit during the infringement period claimed by Zhou Lolun was approximately 195.8 million yuan. Considering that New Balance mainly used "New Balance" to introduce and promote its products during the sales process, it was an infringement of sales behavior, so it was determined as appropriate. The amount of compensation New Balance paid to Zhou Lolun should account for one-half of its total profits, that is, 98 million yuan (including reasonable expenses). New Balance was dissatisfied and appealed.
After hearing the case, the Guangdong High Court confirmed that the facts found by the original court were true. The court of second instance held that Zhou Lelun’s registered trademark involved in the case is still legal and valid, his rights are relatively stable, and he should be protected in accordance with the law. New Balance was established on December 27, 2006, later than the application date for the registered trademark involved in Zhou Lelun's case. The existing evidence cannot prove that New Balance enjoys the prior rights to the corporate name and trade name, the prior right to use unregistered trademarks, and the prior right to the unique name of well-known products in relation to the "New Balance" logo.
The Guangdong High Court: The reason for calculating compensation based on the entire product profit is untenable
As for the amount of compensation, the Guangdong High Court believes that consumers pay more attention to "N" and "N" when purchasing New Balance products. The "NB" and "NEW BAL-ANCE" trademarks have a high reputation and the good product quality they contain. New Balance's operating profits are not all derived from infringement of Zhou Lelun's "Bailun" and "New Balance" trademarks. Therefore, Zhou Lelun There is no right to claim against New Balance for the profits derived from its own trademark goodwill or the inherent value of its products. Zhou Lolun claimed that New Balance’s entire product profits during the period of alleged infringement should be used as the basis for calculating the amount of damages. The reason is untenable.
In addition, New Balance’s infringement was subjective and intentional. That is, when the trademark objection raised by “New Balance” against Zhou Lelun’s application for registration of the “New Balance” trademark was rejected, New Balance knew that Zhou Lelun was interested in “Bailun”. , enjoys the rights to the "New Balance" trademark, but still ignores the existence of other people's trademark rights and the relevant provisions of China's Trademark Law. Based on the evidence in the entire case, the Guangdong High Court determined that New Balance should compensate Zhou Lelun for economic losses and reasonable expenses paid to stop the infringement, totaling 5 million yuan.