大学生疯狂高潮呻吟免费视频,成人特级毛片全部免费播放,精品一卡二卡三卡四卡兔,国产美女被遭强高潮白浆

Unitalen Representing "DR. MARTENS" First Won Judicial Determination of a Famous Trademark, and "馬丁靴(Martin Boots)" Determined Not to Be a Common Name for Footwear and Boots Goods

August 28, 2024

Case Brief

The plaintiff, Airwair International Limited (hereinafter referred to as "Airwair" or "the plaintiff"), as the exclusive global authorized licensee of the "Dr. Martens" series of trademarks, including the No. 584207 international registered trademark, is responsible for the design, production, promotion, and sale of the series of products of the brand "Dr. Martens" in China. Since the 1960s, "Dr. Martens" footwear and boots products have been sold in more than 80 countries and regions worldwide, one of the most recognizable footwear trademark brands in the world. Since 2003, "DR. MARTENS" and its products have been advertised and reported by the Chinese newspapers and media. In 2007, the brand "Dr. Martens" entered the Chinese market, with its sales areas covering all over the country. The brand has enjoyed high popularity in China.

The defendant, Hu, the legal representative of a clothing company in Shantou, filed an application in July 2011 and obtained the approval in June 2012 for registration of the No. 9780715 "Dr. mannar" trademark for use on the same goods "clothing; footwear" as the authorized trademark. The defendant, the clothing company in Shantou, sold footwear and boots products on Tmall, Taobao, 1688 and other e-commerce platforms, and used the infringing marks such as "馬丁(Martin)", "馬丁靴(Martin Boots)", "馬丁鞋(Martin Shoes)", "MARTIN", and "Dr. Mannar" on the homepages of the stores, the linked webpages of the goods, the packaging of the shoe boxes, the wrapping paper and other places. Airwair filed a lawsuit with the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court on the grounds that the aforementioned acts of the defendant constituted trademark infringement.

Determination of the Court

Upon trial, the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court held that the plaintiff, by virtue of the authorization, is entitled to conduct sales and promotion concerning the No. G584207 trademark "DR. MARTENS" (hereinafter referred to as "the authorized trademark") in China and to file a civil lawsuit on the basis of the license. The authorized trademark has enjoyed a high reputation in China after a long period of advertisement, use and promotion, and has already become a famous trademark in the goods of "footwear, boots and clothing" on which it is approved for registration. Further, the sued infringing goods also pertain to footwear and boots goods, and because the defendant Hu has registered the No. 9780715 trademark for "Dr. Mannar", it is necessary to obtain the determination of the famous trademark in this case. The sued "Dr. mannar" "Dr. Mannar馬丁靴(Martin Boots)", "", "" and other marks are similar to the plaintiff's authorized trademarks "Dr. Martens", "馬丁(Martin) Dr. MARTENS", "", etc., in terms of the letter composition, pronunciation, and Chinese and English meanings. The clothing company in Shantou used the sued marks on footwear and boots goods and sold them on various online shopping platforms. Such act would easily make the relevant public believe that the goods have the same source or there is a close connection between their sources, and thus may easily confuse the public with source of the goods. In addition, there was no evidence in the case that the term "馬丁靴(Martin Boots)" is a legal or conventionally used common name. On the contrary, various advertisements and reports concerning the authorized trademark can all reflect that the term "馬丁靴(Martin Boots)" corresponds to or is directed to the authorized trademark, which has formed a certain correspondence with the authorized trademark. Therefore, the sued acts constitute an infringement of the authorized trademark.

In the end, the court ruled that the clothing company in Shantou and Hu should cease the infringement immediately and eliminate the influence and that punitive damages should be applied to fully support the litigation request for compensation of 3 million yuan by Airwair. This case is now in its second trial.

Typical Significance

This case is a typical case for a famous trademark to combat malicious registration and infringing acts, which helps deter the malicious infringing acts of "free-riding" in the market.

 

Keywords

国产精品福利网红主播| 美日欧激情av大片免费观看| 欧美日韩一本无线码专区| 亚洲欧美色一区二区三区| 天堂网最新版在线www中文| 97久久香蕉国产线看观看| 24小时日本高清免费看下载| 公交车大龟廷进我身体里视频| 最新亚洲AV电影网站| 狠狠色噜噜狠狠狠狠av不卡| 国产卡一卡二卡三卡四100| 国产精品视频一区二区三区四 | 含羞草一卡2卡3卡4卡| 精品人妻人人爽久久爽av | 西西人体大胆牲交视频| 人妻无码一区二区不卡无码av | 亚洲av综合色区| 曰本女人与公拘交酡免费视频| 八戒网站免费观看视频 | 中国无码人妻丰满熟妇啪啪软件| 免费午夜男女高清视频| 精品人妻码一区二区三区| 亚洲av永久无码天堂网手机版| 大肉大捧一进一出好爽视频mba| 亚洲一区二区三区在线观看网址| 国产午夜亚洲精品不卡网站| 亚洲色大成网站WWW久久| 99麻花豆传媒剧国产| 性色av一二三天美传媒| 大胸美女被吃奶爽死视频| 99re66在线观看精品免费| 欧美性少妇xxxx极品高清hd | 最近的2019中文字幕国语在线| 成人网站免费观看永久视频下载| 强辱丰满的人妻hd高清| 美女裸体18禁网站免费看图片| 人妻aⅴ中文字幕| 欧美精品毛片久久久久久久| 女人扒开屁股让男人桶| 青青久在线视频免费观看| 久久久国产精华液2023|