"Lights" trademark was registered and then sell "lights beef" is not infringed? (FIG)

Lights in beef as a traditional name Sichuan food, widely loved by the people, all kinds of lights in the mall beef products is dazzling. At 2:30 on July 20 afternoon, the Chengdu Intermediate People's Court first gavel sounded courtroom, along with the lights of beef caused trademark infringement dispute case a public hearing.

Sichuan century lights in beef food limited liability company (referred to as "A Company") as a case of the prosecution, but also "lamplight" Text registered trademark of all parties, accused Dazhou Wang Lung Meat Products Co., Ltd. (referred to as "B Company") obviously sale infringing goods marked "lights beef" and "beef lights" message.

The presiding judge of the case by the National Trial business experts, party members in the hospital as Chengdu Hu Jianping, the Chengdu Intermediate Min San Zhong Xi Kun served as President of the Tribunal judges and people's assessors totaling three collegial panel composed. Under the auspices of the presiding judge Hu Jianping, more than two hours of trial paced intense battle, highlights frequent. B companies to prove their production of "lights beef" is just using a generic name beef lights this product, also invited Sichuan Province Intangible Cultural Heritage He Yao whole testify. A firm hold "lights" trademark and selling Company B "lights Beef" alleged infringer "We request that the defendant was ordered to immediately stop the infringement and compensation for economic loss of 5 million yuan." The trial started, Company A would clearly suit request.

A company alleged that in March 2012 they auction transferee made No. 141,529 "lights" word trademark, Approved Product for the 29 categories such as beef and beef continued on pre-packaged goods using the "lights" trademark. However, since 2013 to date, the defendant B production company in Sichuan, Chongqing and related electronic business platform and selling the allegedly infringing goods, the defendant's goods, including beef, beef slices, where the beef product in front of plastic bags prominently use the "plain man" graphic trademark, and marked with the words "lights beef" in the canned beef product uses "plain man" and "lights beef" logo.

Company B of this proposed "lights Beef" and "Beef lights" is the generic name of the product, the rational use of the product did not constitute trademark infringement. As for the A company advocated "Because Company B infringement, the past three years has resulted in a loss of 531 million yuan the plaintiff on similar products" on the loss of the idea, put forward after survey shows that Company B is not true, the court rejected the prosecution's request all claims.

In the previous July 5 and July 12, the Full Court has twice had chaired a pre-trial conference on the case of procedural and evidentiary matters to sort and organize the original defendant, the two sides exchange of evidence. The main pre-trial conference on court cases were reported and both the focus of controversy and court will hear focused in four aspects: "lights Beef" and "Beef lights" is the generic name is an item; B company on commodity whether it is justified to use the generic name? Company B "lights Beef" and "Beef lights" is used, will cause confusion to the public? A company whether because of B's behavior economic losses?

Under the auspices of the presiding judge of the court will be the court investigation and court debates merger-related issues, according to the focus of controversy conduct forensic investigations and court debate followed.

Intangible heritage inheritors called to testify earlier than beef lights "lights" trademark exists

For the "lights Beef" and "Beef lights" constitutes a generic name, B the whole company for Yao He witnesses to testify to the origins of lights and lights in beef and beef-related heritage will be described. He Yao Florida all people engaged in food processing for many years, had studied Sichuan lights beef third generation learning craftsmanship lights beef, served as director of long lights beef, beef is the inheritor of the lights in the province of intangible cultural heritage. "Lights beef founded in 1896, to date about 120 years ...... inheritance case lights beef, He Yao whole familiar. He Yao-chuen, he said he would like to note that the first beef with lights, lights came later trademark.

A company protested that their demands are "lights" trademark has been infringed, the defendant has stated "lights beef" "lights beef" is a traditional craft, and witnesses described lights in beef inheritance cases, and no case any association. Company B made this defense opinions and evidence is to prove, first lights after the lights trademark beef.

Ultimately, the court decided to be adopted on the testimony of witnesses, that the testimony of witnesses, mainly to prove some of the origin and inheritance cases lights in beef, the issue of the court judgment "lights beef" and "lights Beef" whether GM products have relevance, and witness testimony will prove force down the overall judgment.

B's behavior whether it is reasonable to use common trade name, A company still insisted that "lights Beef" and "Beef lights" do not belong under the general trade name, generic name dispute should be the product of "Beef" and "Beef "Therefore company B on the packaging does not belong to legitimate the use of generic names.

B company suggested using the word "lights Beef" just want to highlight the item "what", but also the trademark "plain man" word more freely, the association does not make consumers think of another product trademarks It is a legitimate, reasonable and bona fide use of common trade names.

A company that, due to violations of Company B, only the last three years has resulted in a loss of more than 5.31 million yuan on similar products, requesting an order B company compensation for economic losses of 500 million. The company said it could not agree to this B: "The company involved in the use of product names and logos, using only the name identifies a process, there is no loss to the other party." 2013 to 2015 annual sales for Company A submitted the amount of proof, B does not recognize the company also said: "we have applied for a court to order the investigation to the tax authorities conducted a survey, the plaintiff company and no relevant evidence to prove that they suffered the alleged loss."

Uncompromising reluctant mediation court will choose sentencing

Published a comprehensive debate heard in the last session, the prosecution reiterated Road: lights in beef and beef wire lights is not a generic name, it should be specific to the plaintiffs registered a "lamplight trademark" of beef and beef products. The behavior of the defendant has caused public confusion related products, as well as to the plaintiff caused direct economic losses, the defendant should bear the corresponding legal responsibility for their actions.

In this regard the defense once again responded: We recognize the plaintiff "lights" trademark ownership, but we can not prohibit the use of legitimate trade in generic name merchandise. "I ask the court to support the plaintiff party." "The court rejected the plaintiff's request to prosecute." Trial lasted more than two hours, finally ending in the fierce confrontation and controversy. A company expressed reluctance to accept mediation, B company proposed, based on the attitude of the prosecution, and therefore do not accept mediation.

The presiding judge said that after the court investigation and court debate, the facts of the case have been ascertained, the two sides have been fully listen to the views, the Full Court will be adjourned for a comprehensive judgment on the entire case and the probative force of the evidence, the views of both the original defendant and their agents be fully considered. Depending on the circumstances of the case, the dispute between the two parties, decided another case of sentencing, sentencing until further notice.