Brief description of the case

Company A is an original wedding dress design and sales enterprise, the company's designers and products have won numerous industry honors, and for many years in a row, the e-commerce platform wedding veil sales category first place. Due to the company used for many years "Dear White" commercial logo by outsiders in the 14th class jewelry and other related categories, affecting the normal operation of the enterprise, entrusted the Kyoto firm special handling.

Kyoto firm accepted the commission, led by Wang Fei lawyers and Wang Ruiqi lawyers to form a team of agents. According to the case and the combination of case experience, the two lawyers drew up a comprehensive solution of multiple non-litigation procedures supplemented by litigation procedures, and the team worked closely with each other during the implementation process. The case has gone through 2 objection procedures, 2 invalidation procedures, 1 dismissal review procedures, administrative litigation, first trial, second trial, retrial decision, retrial judgment, a total of 9 procedures. Recently, the case was finally won by the Supreme Court and the client's rights and interests were realized.

Summary

The issue of malicious trademark registration is one of the focuses of trademark cases, and the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China has regulated it in several articles. Compared with Article 13 (Protection of Well-known Trademarks), Article 15 (Squatting by Agents and Representatives), Article 30 (Prior Application) and Article 32 (Prior Use) of the Trademark Law, which are related to the protection of the rights and interests of specific subjects and the scope of application is limited, the behavior of "obtaining the registration by other improper means" in Article 44(1) of the Trademark Law is detrimental to the rights and interests of specific subjects, as well as to the rights and interests of the clients. The behavior of "obtaining registration by other improper means" in Paragraph 1 of Article 44 of the Trademark Law harms the interests of unspecified subjects as well as public order. Article 24 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Administrative Cases Concerning Trademark Authorization and Confirmation of Rights stipulates that: "Where a person disturbs the order of trademark registration, damages the public interest, improperly occupies the public resources, or seeks to obtain an undue benefit in a manner other than by deception, the people's court may determine that he or she belongs to the 'other undue means' stipulated in the first paragraph of Article 44 of the Trademark Law. 'other improper means'." In judicial practice for a large number of robbing others of trademarks with a certain degree of popularity, the application of Article 41(1) of the Trademark Law can be considered for regulation. Such cases often require the integrated application of non-litigation and litigation procedures, active and comprehensive organization of evidence, and adherence to procedural exhaustion in order to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of right holders.