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

亚洲人成人无码www| 欧美人与禽2o2o性论交| 亚洲av无码码潮喷在线观看 | 日日碰狠狠添天天爽| 无码人妻丰满熟妇啪啪7774| 国产精品亚洲片在线| 亚洲国产无套无码av电影| 丰满少妇在线观看网站| 性按摩xxxx在线观看| 青草青草视频2免费观看| 毛多水多www偷窥小便| 亚洲av成人一区二区三区在线观看| 久久久久无码专区亚洲av| 亚洲人成网亚洲欧洲无码久久| 欧美黑人疯狂性受xxxxx喷水| 欧美xxxx做受性欧美88| 国产免费又色又爽又黄软件| 国产乱码卡二卡三卡老狼| 国产无夜激无码av毛片| av人摸人人人澡人人超碰妓女| 99这里只有精品| 乌克兰少妇xxxx做受6| 亚洲日韩aⅴ在线视频| 国产三级在线观看免费| 国产精品久久久久一区二区三区| a级毛片免费完整视频| 久久无码潮喷a片无码高潮| 妺妺窝人体色www聚色窝仙踪| 国产精品麻豆va在线播放| 天堂网在线最新版www中文网| 国产精品久久久十八禁| 日本高清在线一区二区三区| √最新版天堂资源网在线| 国产欧美精品一区二区三区| 猫咪免费人成网站在线观看| 18禁免费观看网站| 亚洲国产欧美国产综合一区| 免费人成视频在线播放| 无遮挡边摸边吃奶边做视频免费 | 国产午夜精品一区二区三区不卡 | 18黑白丝水手服自慰喷水网站|