| Add： |
Chaoyang District Wangjing Beijing garden building 25, 6032 |
| Tel： |
400-168-5636 |
| Fax： |
400-168-5636 |
| Email： |
upschinagroup@163.com |
| SiteUrl： |
http://www.szsatkups.com |
|
|
| 山特UPS电源商标傍不得伸手必被捉 Santak UPS trademark power shall will hand caught Bang |
| Time：2016-11-09 Source： Views：5048 |
Santak Electronics (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. received a report from the Chengdu Municipal Intermediate People's court. "Ye and other violations of Santak trademark and unfair competition disputes' verdict makes people feel happy right." Recently, Santak UPS power company responsible person in the case of the China trade news reporter said in an interview.
China's first foreign trademark case
Reporters learned that, as early as the beginning of 1990s, SANTAK trademark dispute case as China's first foreign trademark case has caused widespread concern.
Twentieth Century 80, 90s, personal computers began to enter china. At that time the power quality of the power grid is not good, coupled with the computer motherboard technology is not perfect, when the power situation is encountered, it is easy to cause data loss. Therefore, the user to buy a computer, the configuration of a UPS (uninterrupted power supply) is very necessary. In the middle of 1980s, Santak brand founder He Shaowen to "SANTAK" as the UPS trademark, the product to the Chinese market, sales once occupied the Chinese mainland UPS market share of 60%.
At the beginning of 1989, He Shaowen found that Hongkong Sendon company first registered the SANTAK trademark in mainland Chinese, mass production and sales with the trademark products. For a time, the market is flooded with fake "Santak", the authenticity. In July of the same year, He Shaowen to the State Administration for Industry and Commerce Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of complaints, proposed by the Hongkong Sendon company registered in the mainland of China SANTAK trademark registration inappropriate, apply for a ruling to revoke the trademark.
Since this is the first time since January 13, 1988, "the implementation of the rules for the implementation of the trademark law," the first foreign trademark case, by the parties concerned. After accepting the case, the respondent and the respondent and nearly a year of investigation, in May 28, 1990, ruled that Sendon's SANTAK trademark registration, revocation of the Sendon company registered trademark 335383rd.
Because of the China no "Anti Unfair Competition Law" "trademark law" and "civil law", the judges ruled on the basis of the protection of industrial property is "Paris Convention" tenth paragraph second: "everyone in the business activities in violation of the competition behavior of honest business constitutes unfair competition behavior" and "1988" rules for the implementation of the trademark law twenty-fifth: "for improperly registered trademark, any one can be" cancellation of improperly registered trademark application for a ruling "send a trademark review and Adjudication Board for adjudication."
Well known trademark rights of the road seems doomed. Due to trademark revoked again required a buffer period of one year, in the Santak company waiting to re apply for a year, many use of the trademark "SANTAK" production and sales of popular UPS manufacturers. Disputes continue, the State Trademark Office in December 22, 1992 to make the final ruling, the approval of the 619938th SANTAK trademark rights owned by He Shaowen company.
"Santak as China's intellectual property protection of the beneficiaries, but also witnessed the development of China's foreign trade and the continuous optimization of intellectual property environment." The person in charge said.
Using the fixed evidence in criminal cases
After a number of joint ventures and mergers and acquisitions, founded by He Shaowen "SANTAK" brand is now owned by Santak company, high visibility and great interest is caused by the malicious registration of approximate trademark and corporate name infringement, copy the product packaging and other acts of unfair competition in large numbers. These companies often do the infringement in the product trademark and company name, to a well-known brand. "".
"Santak customer service hotline often received repair calls, said the purchase of the Santak UPS not long before it broke. After verification, we found that a lot of repair products is not genuine Santak, but the trademark 'CSTK' 'ESTK' 'STKPOWER' 'ThanTak' and other counterfeit goods. Even a UPS product called 'ESTK (Eaton Sant)' appears on the website of the government procurement center." According to the person in charge.
From 2014 onwards, Santak company with Guangdong, Jiangxi, Hunan and other places of public security organs of a number of illegal manufacturers were investigated and dealt with. "The trademark infringement and unfair competition litigation in many of the evidence is in the criminal cases of counterfeiting registered trademarks in the fixed, these evidence directly support the civil proceedings." The person in charge.
Santak company with fake evidence materials, on 2 June 2015, Chengdu City Intermediate People's court, ye Zhou and under the name of the company and other 9 units and individuals, the actual use of the proposed "STKUPS" "ISTKI" "SITIK" "OSTKO" trademark with the registered trademark of a similar trademark, requesting the court to stop the name of the enterprise, revocation of infringement, compensation for losses.
It is worth mentioning that the judgment of this case cited counterfeiting in the process of evidence to support the claim, to provide space for the human rights system of play rights. For example, although the defendant Zhou argued that the anti in the sale of products and knowledge in the first instance, but admitted in fake criminal cases in 2014 the use of counterfeit trademark for the benefit of, "(the sale) is not authentic" (the price is much cheaper than genuine) "and" the sale of these products is the map authentic Santak brand reputation, good money". Accordingly, the Court pointed out that this "shows that the sale of goods belonging to the infringement of the exclusive right to use a registered trademark of the facts is clearly known, it can not be exempted from the seller's liability for trademark infringement".
"To stop infringement, selling" enterprise name change "and" compensation ", published a statement to eliminate the influence of" the verdict supports almost all of our claims, judgment of compensation of 6 million 400 thousand yuan in the case of similar trademark infringement are rare,
|
|
Your Current Location：