Chinanews.com, Guangzhou, December 26 (Fang Weibin, Zeng Jieyun and Luo Jie) On December 26, the Case Law Research Institute of the China Law Society and the Guangdong Provincial Higher People's Court released the fifth batch of typical cases of cross-border disputes in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area.

  These 10 cases mainly involve cross-border investment, cross-border trade, cross-border inheritance, protection of Hong Kong's "time-honored brands" and portrait rights of natural persons, and legal confirmation of legal documents of Hong Kong courts, etc., which reflect that Guangdong courts have fully utilized their judicial functions and acted according to the law. Protect the investment, operation, innovation, and entrepreneurship of various market entities, and promote the convergence of judicial rules in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area.

  In the case of Hong Kong resident Guo Moucheng v. Guangzhou Hemei Co., Ltd. for a dispute over portrait rights, Guo Moucheng is a well-known actor and singer in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Since 2019, without the permission of Guo Moucheng, Guangzhou Hemei Company has used Guo Moucheng's portrait for online and offline advertising marketing, making the public mistakenly believe that there is an endorsement relationship between Guo Moucheng and Guangzhou Hemei Company.

  The People's Court of Nansha District, Guangdong Free Trade Zone held in the first instance that the law of the place where the tort was committed should be applied to the tort liability for portrait rights, so the mainland law should be applied in this case.

Guangzhou Hemei Company used its portrait with a certain degree of public recognition and commercial value for advertising and marketing without the permission of Guo Moucheng, which misled the public into thinking that there was an endorsement cooperation relationship between the two parties, which was an infringement of Guo Moucheng's portrait right. Guangzhou Hemei Company shall bear the tort liability of stopping the infringement, making an apology, and compensating for losses.

  In the unfair competition dispute case between Hong Kong Huangdaoyi Huoluo Oil Company v. Shenzhen Huangdaoyi Company.

The founder of Hong Kong Huang Daoyi Huoluo Oil Company is Huang Daoyi from Hong Kong.

In 1994, the drug obtained the Chinese drug import license registration and entered the mainland market.

Shenzhen Huangdaoyi Co., Ltd. was established in 2013. Since 2005, it has applied for registration of a large number of "Huangdaoyi" trademarks in various product categories. .

  Hong Kong Huang Daoyi Huoluo Oil Company believes that the three characters "Huang Daoyi" are highly distinctive.

Shenzhen Huang Daoyi Company registered and used the same words as the registered trademark of Hong Kong Huang Daoyi Huoluo Oil Company as a business name, which constituted unfair competition, and sued Shenzhen Huang Daoyi Company to stop the infringement and compensate for losses.

  The Futian District People's Court of Shenzhen City held in the first instance that Shenzhen Huangdaoyi Company was established in 2013, taking into account the time when "Zhuangdaoyi Huoluo Oil" products entered the mainland market, the convenient and frequent business exchanges between Shenzhen and Hong Kong, and the Hong Kong Huangdaoyi Huoluo Oil Company's name and Due to the relatively high popularity of the trademark, Shenzhen Huangdaoyi Company should have known Hong Kong Huangdaoyi Huoluo Oil Company and its registered trademark, and it clearly had the subjective intention of clinging to the goodwill of Hong Kong Huangdaoyi Huoluo Oil Company, which constituted unfair competition.

(use up)