The MIKA trademark named Hangzhou Lian'an is only recognized as Class 9, specifying alarms, electric locks, wires, anti-theft alarms, loudspeakers, video, sound alarms, and network communication equipment , speakers, speakers and other products have nothing to do with most of Mijia's products. Next, the editor of Jintou introduces whether the United States has been declared to have violated trademarks?
On December 31, the U.S. government’s latest response to the U.S. government’s decision to pay 12 million in compensation for trademark infringement was that most of the rights and interests guaranteed by the U.S. trademark have nothing to do with this lawsuit and will not affect the U.S.’s claims against the U.S. Use of trademarks.
The Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court ruled that the plaintiff, Hangzhou United Security Engineering Co., Ltd., and the defendant, American Communications Technology Co., Ltd., had infringed trademark rights. The court determined that each company constituted infringement and was liable for damages of 12 million yuan. Liability for compensation is 103,800 yuan for Hangzhou Lian'an's reasonable rights protection expenses, *** 12.1038 million yuan.
In the latest response, the trademark owned by Hangzhou Lian'an is MIKA Mijia, and the name is owned by It is MIJIA, Mijia and related combinations. In fact, Xiaomi began to lay out the Mijia trademark as early as August 2014, and began to apply for all categories in May 2015. Currently, there are more than 140 Mijia trademarks and nearly 140 MIJIA trademark.
Hangzhou Lian'an's MIKA Mijia trademark is only approved as Class 9, specifying alarms, electric locks, wires, anti-theft alarms, loudspeakers, videos, sound alarms, and networks Commodities such as communication equipment and loudspeakers have nothing to do with most of Mijia’s products.
At the same time, the name does not agree with the profit of 30% mentioned in the judgment. Because the comprehensive after-tax net profit margin of the namename hardware is less than 1 .The name will appeal immediately to resolve the dispute between the two parties as soon as possible and protect the legitimate rights and interests of the name itself.
Statement on the dispute over the right to use trademarks in the United States
Recently, Hangzhou Lian’an (hereinafter referred to as Hangzhou Lian'an) Security Engineering Co., Ltd. complained to American Communication Technology Co., Ltd. regarding the Mijia trademark. Currently, the American company has the following statement.
1. Most of the rights and interests guaranteed by the Mijia trademark have nothing to do with this lawsuit and are not Affecting the use of the Mijia trademark by the name. The result of this lawsuit was only the first-instance judgment, and the name was appealed. The trademark dispute between the two parties has yet to be resolved.
2. The trademark owned by Hangzhou Lian'an is MIKA Mijia, and we own it It is MIJIA, Mijia and related combinations.
The famous company laid out the Mijia trademark in August 2014. In addition, since May 2015, Xiaomi has also applied for MIJIA, graphics and combinations. So far So far, there are more than 140 Mijia-related trademarks in name, and about 140 MIJIA-related trademarks cover many products
The MIKA Mijia trademark No. 10054096 applied for registration by Hangzhou Lian'an was only approved as the 9th Category, designated alarms, electric locks, wires, anti-theft alarms, loudspeakers, video, voice alarms, network communication equipment, speakers and speakers and other products.
This lawsuit only involves 10 types of millet The dispute over the use of the trademark of the product has nothing to do with most of the rights and interests of Guzi’s Mijia trademark.
3. We do not recognize the profit calculation method mentioned in the same trial judgment. The name has so far been notified to the court, 2018 report It shows that the comprehensive after-tax net profit margin of Name Hardware is less than 1. Although the net profit of different categories is different, the 30 stated in the first-instance judgment clearly deviates from the facts, and we express regret and strong objection to this.
Name The company immediately appealed to resolve the dispute between the two parties as soon as possible and protect its legitimate rights and interests.