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

男女激情爽爽爽免费视频| 微拍福利110| 激情男女高潮射精AV免费| 国产女主播精品大秀系列| 色欲综合视频天天天综合网站| 无码熟妇αⅴ人妻又粗又大| 久久国产精品久久喷水| 最好看的2019中文字幕| 人妻少妇乱子伦无码视频专区 | 国产日韩av在线播放| 国产精品无码无需播放器| 国内少妇高潮嗷嗷叫正在播放 | 婷婷五月综合激情中文字幕| 无码人妻黑人中文字幕| 午夜时刻免费实验区观看| 男人J桶进女人P无遮挡全程 | 调教小奴高潮惩罚play露出| 综合久久国产九一剧情麻豆 | 曰批视频免费30分钟成人| 含羞草一卡2卡3卡4卡| 在线v片免费观看视频| 含羞草影院免费区| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 免费女人黄页网站视频| 看aⅴ免费毛片手机播放| 无码抽搐高潮喷水流白浆| 国产男人的天堂在线视频| 欧美日韩精品| 免费a级毛片无码a∨男男| 最近免费中文字幕mv在线视频3| 强奷漂亮人妻系列老师| 亚洲欧洲日产经典| 国产成人高清亚洲明星一区| 色四月五月开心婷婷网| 久久精品亚洲热综合色| 国产精品久久一区二区| 国产成人无码精品一区在线观看| 成片免费观看视频在线| 永久免费精品影视网站播放器| 两个人看的www在线观看视频| 乱人伦人妻系列|