Tetra Pak, the packaging giant, was angry with a paper suing Shandong Bihai company for infringement. Release date: Source: China Packaging editor: Yu Jia number of Views: 11475 copyright and disclaimer. Core tip: Recently, the people's Court of Haidian District, Beijing (hereinafter referred to as Haidian court) announced a message on the official, Tetra Pak, a giant in the packaging industry, has filed a lawsuit against Shandong Bihai packaging materials Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Shandong Bihai) in the same industry for infringement of trademarks such as "Tetra Pak" and "Tetra Pak bricks"
[China Packaging News] recently, the official of Beijing Haidian District People's Court (hereinafter referred to as Haidian court) published a message, whether it is the research report issued by a third-party research institution or the complaints of consumers, that Bao eventually developed a technology leading Tetra Pak, a giant in the packaging industry of good materials that fully meets the needs of customers, has sued Shandong Bihai packaging materials Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Shandong Bihai) in the same industry to the court because of the infringement of trademarks such as "Tetra Pak" and "Tetra Pak brick", which has been filed at present
the news was confirmed by Haidian courtTetra Pak is one of the largest liquid food packaging system suppliers in the world. Its headquarters are located in Switzerland. There are 11 regions in the world, of which the Greater China region is headquartered in Shanghai. In China, Tetra Pak is mainly engaged in the business of sterile packaging materials for liquid food, sales of filling machines, supply of spare parts and technical services Tetra Pak, which entered the Chinese market in 1979, welcomed the best development opportunity in the Chinese market because of the rise of normal temperature milk. The soft packaging of milk familiar to consumers is called "Tetra Pak" because Tetra Pak accounts for the vast majority of the market share
this time, it was the well-known "Tetra Pak" that caused Shandong Bihai to get into a lawsuit
Tetra Pak Laval holdings credit Co., Ltd. and Tetra Pak packaging (Kunshan) Co., Ltd. jointly sued, requesting that the defendants Shandong Bihai Machinery Co., Ltd., Shandong Bihai, Shandong Bihai Machinery Technology Co., Ltd. and Heyi information technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd. be ordered to stop infringement, apologize, eliminate the impact and compensate for the loss of 1million yuan
Tetra Pak Laval holding credit Co., Ltd. has applied for the registration of trademarks such as "Tetra Pak" and "Tetra Pak brick", which is well known in the industry. Shandong Bihai, which was sued for infringement this time, is actually an old brand in the industryAccording to the industrial and commercial information, Shandong Bihai packaging materials Co., Ltd. should be registered in 2008 according to the specific situation. Its business scope mainly includes the printing of packaging and decoration prints, the production of composite film bags: paper-based composites (inner material, polyethylene) for sterile packaging of liquid food. Sales and leasing of filling equipment, beverage equipment, water treatment equipment, purification and sterilization equipment; Retail: packaging materials; Import and export of goods and technology
according to its official website, the company was founded in 1985 and has sold more than 600 aseptic cartons and canning machines and more than 17 billion paper aluminum plastic composite liquid food aseptic packaging papers. Its products are exported to 30 countries including India, South Korea, Egypt and Russia
Tetra Pak found that Shandong Bihai began to use Tetra Pak trademark at the latest in 2010. Shandong Bihai once used the trademarks of "Tetra Pak" and "Tetra Pak brick" to publicize its products in the information released by mechanical experts, Shenzhou commerce and trade stations, as well as in the reports related to Bihai company, saying that it "supplied Tetra Pak brick type beverage filling machine with high-quality packaging materials, so as to see the change and withstand plastic deformation to find out the surface and internal defects of the wire rod", "Main business: Tetra Pak, Tetra Pak..."
Tetra Pak said that Bihai company used the trademarks exactly the same or similar to Tetra Pak Laval's registered trademarks "Tetra Pak" and "Tetra Pak" on the same goods without permission, which infringed the plaintiff's exclusive right to use registered trademarks
a person in charge surnamed Lin in Bihai, Shandong, told rule of law weekend, "we didn't advertise our Tetra Pak products, but" Tetra Pak "has become an industry lingua franca. For example, we introduced to you that we produce paper aluminum plastic composite liquid food sterile packaging paper, which you may not understand. However, I said that we produce" Tetra Pak ", which you will know at a glance."
general trademarks are similar to general names, except that the latter is generally used to distinguish different kinds of goods (such as "computers"), while the former refers to general names converted from well-known trademarks. The general trademark is no longer significant and representative, and cannot represent the goods of a certain brand, and cannot continue to be used as a trademark
xiongchao, partner of Jingshi law firm and director of trademark legal affairs department, said, "based on Tetra Pak's position in the industry and well-known familiarity, it does not rule out that the use of Shandong Bihai is recognized as the use of a general trademark. However, it depends on whether sufficient evidence can be provided."
to judge whether the trademark can be generalized, we must first see whether the meaning of the trademark name itself is a direct description of the quality, function, purpose and other characteristics of this kind of goods. Second, it depends on whether the trademark owner uses the trademark as a commodity name in the process of use, and whether it objectively desalinates the salient characteristics of the name as a trademark. Third, whether the trade name has been widely used as a general name of goods by peers and consumers
in fact, it is not uncommon for Elliott and Gillespie to face the risk of trademark generalization due to their leading position in the industry. In 2012, Elliott and Gillespie jointly requested the court to revoke the trademark "Google" in a federal lawsuit in Arizona. The reason is that David Elliott and Chris Gillespie have obtained hundreds of domain names with the word "Google". Google opposed the registration of these domain names, saying that its rush to register domain names was an infringement of Google's trademark
recently, the U.S. Federal Court of appeals just announced that it upheld the lower court's judgment on the trademark lawsuit of "Google", ruling that although Google's English name "Google" has become a synonym for Internet search, Google is still generally considered to be a brand name that should be protected
if you want to "get involved" in the anti unfair competition lawsuit against Shandong Bihai, there is also a landmark slogan, "the world sees Tetra Pak, China sees Bihai"
Tetra Pak said that Shandong Bihai used the slogan "the world sees Tetra Pak, China sees Bihai" in the exhibition, and published and used the Tetra Pak trademark and the slogan "the world sees Tetra Pak, China sees Bihai" on the station operated by the defendant Heyi information technology company
in addition, Tetra Pak commissioned a law firm to write letters to Bihai company and its general manager on January 29, 2010 and September 28, 2015, respectively, asking them to stop using this slogan and related trademarks
"this is our slogan, not advertising. Because Tetra Pak is in the leading position in the industry, we are in line with the Tetra Pak brand. It is like the slogan of" catching up with Britain and the United States. " Manager Lin said to
however, in Tetra Pak's view, such a slogan directly links the goodwill of the two. "Tetra Pak's trademark is a symbol of Tetra Pak's provision of excellent products and high-quality services to customers, and embodies the brand commitment of" Tetra Pak, protect good quality ". We will resolutely defend the trademark ownership from infringement through legal channels"
Tetra Pak proposed that due to the direct market competition relationship between Bihai company and the two plaintiffs, it released the advertisement of "the world watches Tetra Pak and China watches Bihai" without the consent of the two plaintiffs, which led the relevant public to believe that "Bihai" and "Tetra Pak" have the same business reputation and commodity reputation, thus making Bihai company improperly obtain market competition opportunities and damaging the fair competition rights and interests of the two plaintiffs, Constitute unfair competition
"according to the limited information publicly available at present, Shandong Bihai is relatively more likely to constitute unfair competition. As a peer competitor, there may be some problems in comparing itself with well-known brands in the same industry." Wang Junlin, senior partner of Beijing Yingke Law Firm and director of intellectual property and anti unfair competition department, told the rule of law weekend
infringement determination is not affected by subjective intent
as the indictment has just been received, manager Lin said to that many of the contents of the lawsuit still need to be verified. "We have no intention of infringement. Many stations add our enterprise's information without our permission, while our own stations do not directly use the" Tetra Pak "trademark. We are still verifying whether Tetra Pak's infringement is indeed authorized by our company."
Xiong Chao said: "the determination of infringement in the civil law is not affected by whether there is subjective intent, as long as it constitutes the fact of infringement. Whether the information published by these stations is related to Shandong Bihai depends on the proof of both parties. Tetra Pak is accompanied by the main proof, and Shandong Bihai also needs to provide corresponding evidence. This also suggests that the company needs to improve its legal awareness in its daily operations to avoid unnecessary losses."
Tetra Pak Shanghai headquarters was asked to confirm the specific calculation method of the compensation of 1million yuan. Tetra Pak did not make a specific explanation, and said that the case was still in the process of processing. Tetra Pak would assist in cooperating with the relevant work of the court, and it was temporarily inconvenient to make any comments
for this lawsuit, Shandong Bihai said that it would not rule out considering the way of out of court settlement
the Haidian court told that at present, the case is under further trial and did not disclose more details