商标权权属、侵权纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例

一、黄钧秋与路易威登马利蒂侵害商标权纠纷上诉案

【裁判要旨】

依据现有事实，注册商标已具有区分商品和服务来源的功能，且所有权人长期使用与宣传使该商标具有显著性和知名度。未经所有权人同意，销售印制与注册商标近似图案的相同品类商品，可以推定销售者明知其销售行为会侵害他人权益的，销售者不仅构成注册商标专用权侵权，也构成不正当竞争，应当承担赔偿责任。

[Judgment Abstract] 

From the given facts, the registered trademark has had the function of distinguishing the source of goods or services, and gained some distinctiveness and reputation owing to the long-term use and promotion by the trademark right-holder. As a result, where a seller sells the goods of the same category printed with the similar trademark design without the approval of the trademark right-holder and the seller can be deemed to have known his or her act would infringe upon others' rights and interests, such act of the seller should not only constitute an infringement upon the right to exclusively use a registered trademark but also unfair competition, and the seller should thus bear the liability for compensation.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.85650773

二、中视天娱国际传媒文化（北京）有限公司与上海天娱传媒有限公司侵害商标权及不正当竞争纠纷上诉案

Beijing CE-MEDIA Co., Ltd. v. Shanghai Tianyu Media Co., Ltd. (appeal case regarding dispute over infringement upon trademark rights and unfair competition)

【裁判摘要】

判断被诉商标是否构成侵权，应当从以下4个方面分析：1.被诉标识是否构成商标性使用；2.被诉标识与注册商标是否构成相同或近似；3.被诉标识使用的商品或服务是否与注册商标核定使用的商品或服务构成类似；4.被诉标识使用行为是否容易导致公众混淆误认。据此，当事人将与注册商标近似的标识用于宣传及商业活动中，属于商标法意义上的商标性使用，且构成相同或类似服务上的近似商标，容易导致公众产生混淆的，被诉标识的使用构成侵害注册商标专用权。

[Judgment Abstract]

To judge whether the use of a disputed trademark constitutes trademark infringement, four aspects can be taken into consideration: first, whether it is used for trademark; second, whether it is identical to or similar to the registered trademark; third, whether it is used on the similar goods or services as licensed by the registered trademark; fourth, whether the use of it may easily cause confusion and mislead the public. As a result, where the person concerned uses the sign similar to the registered trademark in advertising and commercial activities, an infringement upon the right to exclusively use a registered trademark should be constituted, for the circumstance not only meets the requirements of ‘use for trademark' as specified in the Trademark Law, but also constitutes the use of similar trademark on the identical or similar services, thereby easily causing the confusion of the public.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.96547660

[CLI Code]CLI.C. 96547660 (EN)

三、世界经理人文摘有限公司与世界经理人资讯有限公司侵犯商标权与不正当竞争纠纷再审案

World Executive's Digest Limited v. Beijing World Manager Information Co., Ltd. (retrial of case regarding dispute over infringement upon trademark rights and unfair competition)

【裁判要旨】

商标的显著性是指商标能起到区别商品来源的作用，能使相关公众将其所标志的商品来源与其他商品来源区别开来。商标标志固有显著性较弱，可以通过实际使用获得显著性。实践中，整体的显著性较弱的商标，经过以醒目方式突出显示的长期使用后，相关公众能通过该标志区别商品来源的，应认定该标识已经具有了作为商标应有的显著性。

[Judgment Abstract]

The distinctiveness of a trademark means the function of a trademark to indicate the source of goods, that is further to say, the relevant public can distinguish the source of goods with certain trademark from other source of supply. Where a trademark is less distinctive in itself, its distinctiveness can be obtained through its actual use. In practice, despite its weak distinctiveness in itself, a trademark shall still be deemed to have gained the distinctiveness it is supposed to have, provided that after its actual use and display on the conspicuous position of the goods for a long time, the relevant public has thereby been capable of identifying the source of goods.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.106052717

[CLI Code] CLI.C. 106052717 (EN)