Home >

LV V. Hefei Sun City Department Store Trademark Infringement

2014/4/29 18:54:00 8

LVHefeiTrademark Infringement

< p > bags with "a href=" //www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp > LV < /a > can be seen everywhere on the street, but not every one is really "LV".

A few days ago, "LV" for the first time in Anhui province rights, sued Hefei Sun City department store and other second instance infringement cases in the Provincial Higher People's court sentencing, Hefei Sun City department store and so on to pay tens of thousands of Yuan infringement costs.

< /p >


< p > November 2011, Louis Weedon Marley Siti bought a fake "LV" registered woman's shop on the Suzhou road's < a href= "//www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > Sun City < /a > new world two floor, and sent a warning letter to the Sun City 100 cargo company and Sun City property company on February 2012 6 to stop the infringement of the exclusive right to use registered trademarks.

< /p >


In March 2012, Louis Weedon Marley Siti once again bought a fake "LV" registered trademark from a shop run by yuan, and then filed a lawsuit with the intermediate people's Court of Hefei. She requested that the yuan, Sun City department store and Sun City property company stop the infringement, and jointly compensate for its economic losses of 500 thousand yuan and a reasonable expenditure of 37255 yuan.

< /p >


< p > the second instance of the provincial high court held that "a href=" //www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp "Louis Vuitton" /a "Mary" is the right holder of the registered trademark of "LV" series. Its exclusive right to register the registered trademark is protected by our law.

Yuan Mou sells the "LV" bag goods involved in the case, neither legally authorized nor legitimate sources. Its behavior constitutes a trademark infringement and shall bear civil liability for stopping infringement and compensation for damages.

< /p >


< p > Sun City department store as a manager of shopping malls, knowing that the sale of goods involved in the sale of goods in the store has not taken effective measures to prevent the recurrence of infringement, and there are subjective faults.

Objectively, it provides convenient conditions for Yuan Mou's tort, and bears joint legal liability for the consequences of infringement caused by yuan.

Sun City property company is not the manager of Sun City mall. Its behavior does not constitute infringement.

Accordingly, Yuanmou and Sun City Department Store stopped infringement and jointly compensated Louis Weedon Marley Siti for economic losses of 30 thousand yuan, and dismissed Louis Weedon Marley Siti's other claims.

< /p >


< p > April 26th is the world intellectual property protection day. In 2014, the theme of World Intellectual Property Day is: Movie -- the love of the whole world.

In recent years, China's efforts to protect intellectual property rights and crack down on infringement and infringement are increasing. I believe that in the near future, Shanzhai "LV", "GUI--" and "Hermes" will be less and less.

< /p >

  • Related reading

Nuo A Sued Kark'S Shoes To Affect Foot Health.

Law lecture hall
|
2014/4/23 21:56:00
41

EU BPR Regulations Also Have New Challenges Such As Textiles And Footwear.

Law lecture hall
|
2014/4/23 8:24:00
15

The Lawyer Hints That It Is Against The Law To Deduct The "Clothing Fee" Of The Resignation Officer.

Law lecture hall
|
2014/4/23 8:24:00
35

Selling Fake And Luxurious Brand Bags Is Suspect.

Law lecture hall
|
2014/4/18 18:17:00
42

The Origin Of Leather Shoes In Chinese Is Inconsistent With The Actual Situation.

Law lecture hall
|
2014/4/18 14:35:00
30
Read the next article

Analysis And Suggestions On Loan To Lend Funds

Where an enterprise investor fails to pay the required amount of capital within the prescribed time limit, the interest incurred by the enterprise in foreign borrowing is equivalent to the interest payable on the difference between the actual paid capital of the investor and the amount of capital payable within the prescribed time limit. It does not belong to the reasonable expenses of the enterprise, which shall be borne by the investors of the enterprise, and shall not be deducted when calcula