论文部分内容阅读
关于侵犯注册商标专用权和不正当竞争案件一般统称为“傍名牌”案件,最近几年在中国各地中级人民法院的知识产权庭审理颇多,于是在“傍名牌”不正当竞争行为的认定方面也已经趋于统一的认识和判断。然而,在前不久,原告阿迪达斯有限公司诉被告阿迪王体育用品(中国)有限公司、华珠泉州鞋业有限公司等侵犯注册商标专用权和不正当竞争纠纷案件中,一审法院却做出判决,驳回阿迪达斯公司的全部诉讼请求。可以说本案和以往类似“傍名牌”案件大有相似之处,但不同之处在于被告规避了“傍名牌”的认定。本文中,陈镇律师将对法院判决的认定进行解析。
The cases of infringement of the exclusive right to use a registered trademark and unfair competition are generally collectively referred to as cases of “near brand names”. In recent years, the Intellectual Property Tribunal of the Intermediate People’s Courts in various parts of China has handled a large number of cases. Therefore, in the case of unfair competition Recognition of behavior has also tended to a unified understanding and judgment. However, not long ago, the plaintiff Adidas Co., Ltd. v. Defendant Adi Wang Sporting Goods (China) Co., Ltd., Huazhu Quanzhou Footwear Co., Ltd. and other infringement of trademark rights and unfair competition disputes, the court of first instance has made a verdict, Dismissed all the adidas company’s claim. It can be said that the case is similar to the previous similar case, but the difference lies in that the defendant has evaded the determination of “Pong nameplate”. In this article, Chen Zhen lawyer will determine the court decision.