China News Service, August 26 (Zhongxin Finance and Economics Zuo Yuqing) On the 25th, the case of Li Xiangning, daughter of Bruce Lee v. Zhen Kung Fu Fast Food, finally ushered in the trial, and the cause of the case was "general personality rights disputes".

At the same time, # Bruce Lee's daughter claimed 210 million from Real Kung Fu Fast Food # on Weibo's hot search.

　　More than ten years of copyright disputes are finally coming to a conclusion?

Claiming for 210 million real kung fu is not "real kung fu"?

　　The classic yellow kung fu villain trademark of real kung fu is well-known to the Chinese people because of the same demeanor and posture as Bruce Lee.

However, few people know that this image has not been authorized by Bruce Lee and his relatives.

　　In 2019, some media reported that Real Kung Fu Catering was sued by the legal representative of Bruce Lee Enterprises, LLC (Bruce Lee Limited Liability Company), Bruce Lee's daughter Li Xiangning, to the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate Court.

After two years, this lawsuit finally ushered in court on August 25.

Graphics: Peng Jingru from Chinanews.com

　　In the lawsuit disclosed in 2019, the plaintiff asked Zhen Kung Fu to immediately stop using Bruce Lee's image, clarify on the media page for 90 consecutive days that he had nothing to do with Bruce Lee, and requested the court to order Zhen Kung Fu to compensate him for economic losses of 210 million yuan, and to protect his rights reasonably Expenses of 88,000 yuan.

　　In this regard, many netizens expressed their surprise: "I thought it was authorized and supported rights protection!" "The prosecution is right, I thought it was Bruce Lee at first sight, and 90% of people thought it was Bruce Lee. "I went to eat this because I thought it was Bruce Lee's endorsement."

　　According to the official website of Real Kung Fu, the predecessor of Real Kung Fu, "168 Dessert House", was founded in 1990, and it has experienced attempts from "168 Dessert House" and "168 Steamed Food Shop" to "Double Seeds" catering brand.

　　Entering the millennium, Ye Maozhong's marketing planning team is planning for real kung fu.

At that time, martial arts were popular all over the country, so after finalizing the Chinese dining style, the team chose the image carrier of "Kung Fu" for the real Kung Fu, inspired by Bruce Lee, the "King of Kung Fu".

In April 2004, True Kung Fu officially applied for a trademark that resembled Bruce Lee's image.

Screenshot from China Trademark Network.

　　In April 2004, True Kung Fu officially applied for a trademark that resembled Bruce Lee's image, and opened the first True Kung Fu Chinese fast food restaurant in the same year, which has ushered in rapid development since then.

Real Kung Fu has responded: will not seek out-of-court settlement

　　According to previous media reports, at present, in the United States and most countries and regions, Bruce Lee's image, name and other trademark patents are exclusively owned by Bruce Lee's enterprise, foundation and Li Xiangning's mother and daughter.

　　In 2010, Li Xiangning once returned to China from the United States to defend the rights of Bruce Lee's trademark, and mentioned his dissatisfaction with the real kung fu to the media, expressing the need to defend his rights.

Data map: Bruce Lee's widow Li Linda and daughter Li Xiangning attended the 75th anniversary of Bruce Lee's birth.

Photo by China News Agency reporter Hong Shaokui

　　According to media reports, the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce issued an official reply in 2010, stating that "the rights to develop and utilize Bruce Lee and his English name 'BruceLee' should belong to his heirs. Registering as a trademark can easily lead to misunderstanding by consumers and have adverse social impacts.”

　　Regarding Li Xiangning's lawsuit, Zhen Kung Fu responded when the case was filed in 2019: "Zhen Kung Fu series trademarks were applied for by the company and authorized by the State Trademark Office. There have been disputes before, but our trademark has never been judged to be infringed or revoked by administrative or judicial conclusions. After many years of being sued, we are also very puzzled.”

　　Real Kung Fu also told Zhongxin Finance: "We have no infringement and will not seek out-of-court settlement. There is no plan to replace the real Kung Fu brand trademark. The claim of 210 million yuan has no factual and legal basis."

　　Zhongxin Finance has noticed that the trademarks with the image of "Bruce Bruce" applied by Zhenkung currently have 8 trademarks with the status of "registered" and 9 trademarks with the status of "revocation/invalidation application under review".

Lawyer: Real Kung Fu trademark is highly recognizable or constitutes infringement

　　In the face of Li Xiangning's rights protection, it can be said that she has a tough attitude.

So, is there any infringement of the real Kung Fu trademark?

　　Zhao Zhan, a lawyer from Beijing Yunjia Law Firm and a special researcher at the Intellectual Property Research Center of China University of Political Science and Law, believes that this case is different from the general portrait rights case.

"Real Kung Fu doesn't use Bruce Lee's photos directly, but uses the way of painting, but the image does have a lot of similarities, such as hairstyle, posture and clothing."

　　He pointed out that to determine whether the case constitutes a portrait infringement, it mainly depends on whether the image used by the defendant can make the general public think that this is Bruce Lee.

Diagram from the litigation materials of Bruce Lee Enterprises, LLC (Bruce Lee LLC).

　　Zhang Xiaoju, a lawyer from Zhongwen Law Firm, said that the composition of the trademark, from his demeanor, movements, hairstyles and the word "Kung Fu", reflects Bruce Lee's personal characteristics and is clearly recognizable.

According to Article 3 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning Determining Liability for Compensation for Mental Damage in Civil Torts, the portrait of the deceased is protected by law, and unauthorized use will damage the portrait rights of others.

　　"Now the defendant's trademark is still valid, but the validity of the trademark does not necessarily mean that it does not constitute infringement. It also depends on how the court decides. I personally think that it is more likely to be found to constitute infringement." Zhao Zhan said.

　　However, according to Article 45 of my country's Trademark Law: "Within five years from the date of trademark registration, the prior right holder or interested party may request the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board to declare the registered trademark invalid. For malicious registration, the well-known trademark shall be owned by People are not subject to the five-year time limit."

　　Now, it has been 18 years since the application for registration of the real kung fu trademark, and whether the application for revocation of the trademark can be supported is still unknown.

(Finish)