The relationship between Beijing MUJI and Japan MUJI

The relationship between Beijing MUJI and Japan MUJI. Since its birth in December 1980, MUJI has mainly promoted food, From private brands of lifestyle department stores to benchmark companies in the global retail industry, from Japan to the world, there is a relationship between Beijing MUJI and Japan MUJI. Relationship between Beijing MUJI and Japan’s MUJI 1

There is no relationship between the two companies Beijing’s MUJI and Japan’s MUJI, but careful people may find that Beijing’s MUJI MUJI is an imitation of Japanese MUJI, but it just registered the MUJI trademark.

1. The beginning and end of the matter:

In recent days, Japan’s Muji has issued a statement stating that it will eliminate manufacturers that infringe Japan’s Muji from the market. In this statement Central and Japanese companies use the term squatting for good products. MUJI in Beijing believed that Japan's MUJI was mirroring their commercial defamation, so they once again sued Japan's MUJI. Many friends may not be able to tell which of these two MUJI products is the real one. In fact, the Japanese MUJI products are the authentic MUJI products. However, because the Japanese MUJI products are not sold in mainland China, I applied for a trademark, so it was registered by a merchant in Shanghai. After this Shanghai merchant registered the MUJI trademark, no matter how heavy the publicity was, the name of the store or the decoration inside the store were all imitating the Japanese MUJI. Japan's MUJI has suffered a lot. I have tried to protect my rights and interests through legal means before. Since the registered trademark of Beijing Muji is completely reasonable and legal, it is said that the last time Nippon Muji lost the lawsuit and was required to compensate 650,000 yuan. This time, Beijing Muji sued the Japanese Muji Court, but the matter was not tried in court and is still under investigation.

2. Why is MUJI so popular?

So how did Weiliangpin become so popular? This is because MUJI’s products pay more attention to quality than to trademarks. One of the reasons why MUJI is extremely popular in Japan is that MUJI’s price is relatively low. It is the favorite brand of Japanese people. At such a low price At the same time, MUJI can also guarantee high quality and extremely comfortable texture, which is why it is extremely popular in Japan. After MUJI entered the Chinese market, it was deeply demanded by the Chinese middle class and gradually became a necessity for the middle class. Some literary and artistic youths in China even use MUJI products all year round.

3. Why did MUJI decline?

However, in recent years, Wuye Liangpin has begun to fall from the altar in China. The main reasons are that the quality of Muji Liangpin has declined year by year, and Muji’s food has been detected to contain hereditary carcinogens. The MUJI brand has become covered with a layer of dust. And in recent years, many similar MUJI products have appeared one after another in China. Brands such as Miniso and NetEase have carefully selected these domestic products to have almost the same quality as MUJI products, but the price is less than that. Half of MUJI's products also took away a large amount of the market, which is the reason for MUJI's decline. Relationship between Beijing MUJI and Japan MUJI 2

Since its birth in December 1980, MUJI has grown from a private brand focusing on food and daily necessities to a benchmark enterprise in the global retail industry, from Japan to the world. , has been making great progress and won the recognition of consumers all over the world. However, after MUJI had been in the Chinese market for many years, it unexpectedly encountered a home textile store in Beijing that also used the "MUJI" brand, and a trademark war started.

A year ago, a "MUJI" trademark registered by Beijing Miantian Textile Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Miantian Company") in the 24th category of textiles, bedding and other commodity categories was once used by The public opinion that "Japan's 'Muji' lost its lawsuit against China's 'Muji'" is rampant. However, in 2019, the dispute over the "MUJI" trademark has not been settled, and the situation has become more complicated.

In November 2019, the Beijing Higher People's Court issued a second-instance civil judgment, identifying the operating entity of Japan's MUJI "Ryōpin Project Co., Ltd." (hereinafter referred to as " "Liangpin Project") and its Shanghai company infringed the "MUJI" trademark rights of Cotton Field Company.

The court held that the "MUJI/MUJI", "MUJI" and "MUJI" logos used by Japan's Muji on bath towels, face towels, quilt covers, pillowcases and other products are inconsistent with the Class 24 No. 7494239 of Cotton Field Company. The "MUJI" trademark constitutes a similar trademark on the same or similar goods.

This has also brought the trademark dispute between the two companies into the public eye again, and the mystery hidden behind the "MUJI" trademark has gradually emerged.

As early as 1980, the "MUJI" brand was created by designer Ikko Tanaka. Muji, which is famous for its "MUJI" (that is, products without trademarks), in order to protect the trademark After being used fraudulently, I first applied for a registered trademark in Japan. Since 1999, Ryohin Kekei has applied to China’s Trademark Office to register the “MUJI” trademark for various types of goods and services, and all of them have been approved for registration.

However, before Ryohin Keika applied for registration of the Class 24 trademark, Hainan Nanhua Industrial Trading Company (hereinafter referred to as "Nanhua Company") registered a Class 24 trademark in April 2000. (Cotton fabrics, towels, sheets, quilts, etc.) The trademark No. 1561046 "MUJI" was applied for registration on the goods, and the trademark was transferred to the name of Miantian Company in July 2004. In 2011, Miantian Company established a subsidiary "Beijing Muji Investment Co., Ltd." under the brand name "MUJI".

Unexpectedly, it was the Class 24 trademark that triggered a series of trademark disputes between the two companies that lasted for 18 years.

April 26, 2001, is an important day. This day is the first "World Intellectual Property Day" established by the World Intellectual Property Organization. Coincidentally, it was also on this day that the "MUJI" trademark war officially started between the two companies. On the same day, Ryohin Project filed an objection to the Trademark Office against the "MUJI" trademark No. 1561046.

However, this objection was not successful - the Trademark Office’s opposition ruling in January 2004 and the original Trademark Review and Adjudication Board’s objection review ruling in March 2009 both approved the registration of the trademark. Liangpin Project then filed an administrative lawsuit with the court. After the first and second instances, the court upheld the ruling, and then the Supreme People's Court brought the case for trial.

In its judgment in June 2012, the Supreme People's Court held that the evidence provided by Ryohin Project could only prove that its "MUJI" trademark was sold in Japan, Hong Kong, etc. before the application date of the opposed trademark. The local publicity and use and the popularity in these areas cannot prove the fact that the "MUJI" trademark is actually used on Class 24 towels and other goods in mainland China and has a certain influence. Therefore, the final judgment is made to uphold the original judgment. judgment.

However, the other party in the game, Cotton Field Company, seems to be "justified". After all, it is an indisputable fact that Cotton Field Company has registered the 24th category "MUJI" trademark first.

In this regard, Professor Liu Chuntian, Dean of the School of Intellectual Property at Renmin University of China, pointed out that mechanical understanding of the regional characteristics of intellectual property should be avoided. "Regionality should not be a tool for people with ill-intentioned intentions to circumvent the law and infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of others," he said.

In fact, many scholars now believe that although the limitations of technical conditions make trademark rights have regional characteristics, with the continuous maturity of technologies such as the Internet, the dissemination of global information has overcome regional restrictions. , therefore we should grasp the economic and legal roots and use market economy and global thinking to understand.

Xiao Jiangping, director of the Competition Law Research Center of Peking University, believes that the Anti-Unfair Competition Law "has a certain influence" on product names, and it can also be analyzed from aspects such as time, region, and business volume. "The sales data of Ryohin Keikan Co., Ltd. in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Japan, including sales volume, sales volume, profit, number of stores, number of staff, etc., are also important indicators for judging influence.

< p> However, what is not known to the public is that the above-mentioned judgment of the Supreme Court only represents the end of the trademark opposition procedure. As for the competition for the “MUJI” trademark rights in the 24 categories, it is reported that No. 1561046 “No. The "Yinliangpin" trademark has currently entered the invalidation declaration process. If Liangpin Plan proposes new facts or reasons during the invalidation declaration procedure, different results may occur.

Liangpin Plan Of course, painting is not willing to give up.

Shortly after the Supreme People's Court made its judgment on the "MUJI" trademark administrative case No. 1561046, in 2014, Liangpin Project filed a lawsuit against Cotton Field Company's subsidiary Beijing in the Beijing Intellectual Property Court on the grounds of trademark infringement and unfair competition. MUJI filed a series of lawsuits, requesting the latter to immediately stop infringement of trademarks such as "MUJI" and "MUJI" under the name of MUJI, and stop using the words "MUJI" and "MUJI" company name, publish a statement to eliminate adverse effects, and compensate for corresponding economic losses and reasonable expenses.

In July 2017, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court made a first-instance judgment on this series of cases, holding that Beijing Muji Company, a subsidiary of Miantian Company, used "MUJI" and "MUJI" on products accused of infringement without permission. The "MUJI HOME" and "MUJI" logos are cases where trademarks that are identical or similar to the Ryohin Kekei registered trademark are used on the same product, which can easily lead to confusion and misunderstanding by the relevant public. In fact, some relevant public have already done so. In order to avoid confusion and misunderstanding, the actions of Beijing Muji Co., Ltd., a subsidiary of Miantian Company, infringed upon the exclusive rights of Liangpin Co., Ltd. to the trademark involved in the case.

The court also held that Beijing MUJI Company used the corporate name "Beijing MUJI Investment Co., Ltd." and "MUJI" including "MUJI" in its alleged infringing products and publicity and promotion activities. The English company name "Mujihome (Beijing) Investment Co., Ltd" and so on constitute unfair competition against Ryohin Kekei.

Therefore, the court ordered Beijing Muji Co., Ltd. to stop relevant infringement activities, issue a statement to eliminate the impact, and compensate Liangpin Project for economic losses and reasonable expenses totaling nearly 2 million yuan. Although Beijing Muji Company appealed the verdict, the second-instance verdict issued by the Beijing Higher People's Court in December 2017 still upheld the original verdict. After the judgment was finalized, Beijing Muji Co., Ltd. paid compensation to Liangpin Project.