[Commentary] On the morning of April 22, the Guangzhou Yuexiu Court opened a court session to hear Beijing ByteDancing Technology Co., Ltd. and Beijing Weibo Vision Technology Co., Ltd. v. Guangzhou Popular Technology Co., Ltd. (formerly Guangzhou Douyin E-Commerce Technology Co., Ltd.) infringing trademarks. Power and unfair competition disputes.
[Same period] Judge Chen Yonghua of the Fourth Court of the People's Court of Yuexiu District, Guangzhou
The key point is a conflict of rights, that is, the plaintiff, who registered the trademark exclusive right "Douyin", and one of his character logos, then the defendant in Guangzhou, he also went through a legal registration. Then his company name contains the name of Douyin. Then the name right of this enterprise is also legally registered. Then, as a defendant, whether I use this name right to infringe on the trademark right of the plaintiff is a conflict of rights, which is also a key to the trial of this case.
[Commentary] During the court hearing that day, the plaintiff believed that although the defendant changed the company name to a popular company, it still used "shaking sound" in business premises, employee certificate lanyards, employee business cards, promotional posters, business contracts, online advertisements, etc. Etc. logo. The defendant has infringed on the exclusive right of the trademark of ByteDance Company, and carried out false publicity, which made the public mistakenly believe that it was authorized by ByteDance Company or belonged to the e-commerce department of ByteDance Company. Legitimate competition. To this end, the two plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in the People ’s Court of Yuexiu District of Guangzhou City, appealed to popular companies to stop trademark infringement and unfair competition, and published a statement in the mainstream media to eliminate the impact, as well as compensation for economic losses and reasonable rights protection costs totaling 3 million yuan. Renminbi.
[Same period] Judge Chen Yonghua of the Fourth Court of the People's Court of Yuexiu District, Guangzhou
Then the defendant has changed the name of his company during the litigation process, but it still uses the word "shaking sound" in its business premises. And some of its logos. So does it constitute an act of unfair competition for the plaintiff? For example, did the defendant attach the popularity of the trademark of the plaintiff, and obtain a favorable position in the market through the behavior of hitching a ride near the famous brand, which harmed the legitimate rights and interests of the plaintiff, did it violate our recognized business ethics, and also The second controversial focus of our trial.
[Explanation] The defendant argued that he was engaged in e-commerce activities related to the Douyin platform, and the description of the business content needed to mention "Douyin", so the name was "Douyin E-commerce" and the defendant used "Douyin" as a non-trademark Sexual use, which means that the platform for providing services is the Douyin short video platform, is used properly, does not constitute a trademark infringement, and there is no competitive relationship between the defendant and the plaintiff, nor does it harm the legitimate rights and interests of the plaintiff or consumers. Increase the plaintiff's income, will not cause confusion to the relevant public.
[Commentary] At present, the case is under further review.
(Reporter Wei Jiefu from Guangdong)
Editor in charge: [Wang Kai]