Civil judgment of Nanshan District People's Court, Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province

    Nanshan District People's Court, Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province

    Written judgment of civil affairs

    (2016) No. 6590, 0305, Early Republic of China

    Plaintiff: Opai Furniture Group Co., LTD., domicile: No. 366, Guanghua Third Road, Baiyun District, Guangzhou city, unified social credit code ××97C.

    Legal representative: Yao Liangsong, chairman of the board.

    Attorney: Zhai Mingyue, lawyer of Shandong Changping Law Firm.

    Agent AD litem: Wang Ning, lawyer of Shandong Changping Law Firm.

    Defendant: Shenzhen Emperor Supreme Sanitary Ware Co., LTD., 1318, Floor B, Building B, Tianxia International Center, Taoyuan Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen.

    Legal representative: Chen Qiahuang.

    Agent AD litem: Liu Maolin, lawyer of Beijing Bairui (Shenzhen) Law Firm.

    Agent AD litem: Nan Chao, trainee lawyer in Beijing Bairui (Shenzhen) Law Firm.

    Defendant: Shengyun Ceramics Factory, Guxiang Town, Chaoan District, Chaozhou City. Business address: Qiluanmen Early Garden, Guxiang Town, Chaoan District, Chaozhou City.

    Operator: Chen Feng, male, born on November 23, 1979, Han Nationality, id address: Chaoan County, Guangdong Province,

    The plaintiff opie household group co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as the European household company) and the defendant shenzhen emperor sanitary ware co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as the supreme emperor company), moisture chaozhou district town charm of ancient alley ceramics factory (hereinafter referred to as the verve ceramics factory) dispute case of unfair competition, our college on 2 June 2016, Hitachi, in accordance with the applicable ordinary procedure, shall be conducted by a Huang Juanmin as the presiding judge, and people's assessors Ma Hong, Cai Baoni formed a collegial panel and on February 17, 2017 public hearing on the trial. Wang Ning, the authorized agent AD litem agent of the plaintiff Opai Household Company, attended the lawsuit in court. The defendant Emperor Supreme Company and the defendant Shenyun ceramics Factory were legally summoned by the court and failed to attend the lawsuit without proper reasons. The court was absent from the trial according to law. The case is now closed.

    The plaintiff Opai Home Furnishing Company files a lawsuit to the court: 1. The defendant Imperial Supreme Company immediately stops selling toilet utensils and other sanitary wares marked "Opai Sanitary ware Co., LTD."; 2. Ii. The defendant Imperial Supreme Company immediately stopped the unfair competition behavior of using the word "Opai" to carry out false propaganda in its online store; 3. The defendant Verve ceramics factory immediately stopped producing and selling toilet articles marked "Oupai Sanitary Ware Co., LTD"; Iv. The two defendants shall compensate the plaintiff a total of RMB 1 million for economic losses and reasonable expenses for safeguarding their rights; 5. The two defendants shall bear the costs of the case. Facts and reasons: the plaintiff class 11, "European" and "OPPEIN" registered trademark, since its inception, after decades of operation, have "European" molded into the household, known as furniture, electrical appliances, sanitary brand, the brand has won the "Chinese famous brand", "Chinese well-known commodities" such as reputation, in the public mind, "Europe" has become not only the plaintiff products and on behalf of the symbol of the enterprise name, also become the instructions of the plaintiff and the plaintiff associated enterprises significant recognition of market main body and the sources of identity. In December 2015, the plaintiff found that the defendant Emperor Supreme Company had opened "Oupai Bathroom Enterprise store" on Taobao.com, and sold toilet utensils and other bathroom products marked "Oupai Bathroom Co., LTD" with a large number of "Oupai" words. The plaintiff applied for evidence preservation at the notary office for the aforesaid infringement. To sum up, the plaintiff that the defendant to clings to the plaintiff's enjoyment of the "European" brand reputation, deliberately in the online store, products, and company name on the illegal use of "European" words, the behavior is not only the infringement of the right to exclusive use of a registered trademark of the plaintiff, and violate the principles of honesty and credit and recognized business ethics, to the plaintiff constitutes unfair competition, and caused great economic losses to the plaintiff, shall bear the corresponding legal responsibility.

    The defendant Imperial Supreme Company did not attend the proceedings, but submitted a written defense opinion and argued that the plaintiff's claim is groundless. The toilet seats sold by the defendant Imperial Supreme Company through Taobao were produced by Hong Kong Oupai Sanitary Ware Co., LTD., and the defendant Shenyun Ceramics Factory was a processing manufacturer. The plaintiff has no right to restrict the outer packing of the products sold by the defendant with the words "Oupai sanitary ware Co., LTD." of the manufacturer; The owner of the 35th trademark of "Opai" is Wuxi Shengbao Vehicle Manufacturing Co., LTD., and the plaintiff has no right to prevent the defendant from using the word "Opai" for marketing in the online store. "Opai Sanitary Ware Co., LTD." is different from the plaintiff's name, and household and sanitary ware also belong to different scope; The plaintiff has no evidence to prove that the products or packages sold by the defendant prominently use the word "Opie"; Ii. The 11th class of the registered trademark of the plaintiff, "Opai", is not significant, and the commodities used are not well-known commodities, so there is no basis for claiming trademark infringement; Three, the defendant Imperial Supreme Company in the online store does not exist false propaganda; Iv. After being sued, the defendant Imperial Supreme Company changed the name of its online store to "Facial makeup Bathroom Enterprise Store", and planned to change the name of its online store owner to be the same as the registered name of the defendant Imperial Supreme Industry and Commerce, in order to protect the legitimate interests of the plaintiff.

    The defendant, Shen Yun Ceramics Factory, did not attend the court to answer the lawsuit, nor did it submit evidence materials.

    After trial and ascertainment, I, the original, the main situation of both sides of the defendant.

    Accuser Opai Furniture Co., LTD., established on July 1, 1994, is a joint stock limited company. Its business scope is furniture manufacturing, and its products cover kitchen cabinets, home appliances, sanitary ware and so on. The defendant Emperor Supreme Company, a limited liability company, was established on June 27, 2014. Its business scope includes ceramic sanitary ware, hardware fittings, faucets, flower sprinklers, etc. The defendant, Shen Yun Ceramics Factory, was an individual industrial and commercial enterprise established on August 23, 2011. Its business scope was processing and manufacturing ceramic sanitary ware, and its business place was Qilumen Morning Garden, Guwu Village, Guxiang Town, Chaoan District, Chaozhou City.

    Ii. The plaintiff's trademark and brand management.

    According to the word no. 347 (2016) lai FengCheng card people "notarial deed" records, 4378572 registered trademark "" for the word mark, registered to guangzhou opie ambry enterprise co., LTD., approved by use of goods for 11 categories, including sit implement, shower bath equipment, basin, bathroom equipment, such as registration validity since June 17, 2007, until June 6, 2017. On January 6, 2011, approved by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the name of the registrant was changed to Guangdong Opai Household Products Group Co., Ltd. and Guangdong Opai Group Co., LTD. On March 24, 2014, approved by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the name of the registrant was changed to Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD.

    According to the notarial certificate (2016), registered trademark no. 1128213 is a written trademark registered by guangzhou kangjie kitchen equipment co., LTD. The approved goods are classified as the 20th class, including furniture, sideboard, dishware, etc. The registration is valid from November 21, 1997, solstice, November 20, 2007. On April 7, 1999, approved by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the name of the registrant was changed to Guangzhou Oupai Cabinet Enterprise Co., LTD.; On November 7, 2007, with the approval of the trademark office of the state administration for industry and commerce, the renewed registration is valid from November 21, 2007 solstice and November 20, 2017; On January 6, 2011, approved by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the name of the registrant was changed to Guangdong Opai Group Co., Ltd. and Guangdong Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD. On March 24, 2014, approved by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the name of the registrant was changed to Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD.

    According to the word no. 346 (2016) lai FengCheng card people "notarial deed" records, 1137521 registered trademark "" for the word mark, registered to guangzhou kang jie kitchen equipment co., LTD., approved by using goods of class 11, including the kitchen stove, gas stove, electric cooker, etc., registered since December 21, 1997, valid until December 20, 2007. On March 7, 1999, approved by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the name of the registrant was changed to Guangzhou Opai Cabinet Enterprise Co., LTD.; On November 7, 2007, with the approval of the trademark office of the state administration for industry and commerce, the renewed registration shall be valid from December 21, 2007 solstice and December 20, 2017; On January 6, 2011, approved by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the name of the registrant was changed to Guangdong Opai Group Co., Ltd. and Guangdong Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD. On March 24, 2014, approved by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the name of the registrant was changed to Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD.

    According to the notarial certificate (2016), registered trademark no. 7731876, "OPPEIN", is an alphabetic trademark registered by guangdong opai group co., LTD. The approved products are of class 11, including toilet seats, bathroom fixtures, faucets, etc. The valid period of registration is from March 14, 2011 to March 13, 2021. On March 20, 2012, approved by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the name of the registrant was changed to Guangdong Opai Furniture Group Co., LTD. On March 24, 2014, approved by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, the name of the registrant was changed to Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD.

    According to the word no. 352 (2016) lai FengCheng card people "notarial deed", on March 24, 2015, issued by the copyright office of guangdong province and guangdong I word - 2015 - F - 00001907 "the registration certificate of the works, works name:" Europe ", work categories: F art, the author: Liang Zhaotang, the copyright owner: European household group co., LTD., was first published/production date: August 10, 1996. The words "" and" Liang Zhaotang "are shown on the right side of the certificate.

    On April 24, 2009, the trademark Chi Zi [2009] No. 7 issued by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce recognized the trademark of "Ou Pai" as a well-known trademark, and the registered trademark of "Ou Pai" used on the category 20 sideboard goods of Guangzhou Ou Pai Cabinet Enterprise Co., Ltd. was identified as a well-known trademark.

    According to the word no. 353 (2016) lai FengCheng card people "notarial deed" records: 1, in September 2007, the state administration of quality supervision, inspection and quarantine awarded "China famous brand product certificate, awarded guangzhou opie hutch ark enterprise co., LTD. Production of European brand household cabinet for the Chinese famous brand product, valid for between September 2007 and September 2010. 2. In October 2008, Guangdong Provincial Bureau of Quality and Technical Supervision granted Oupai Kitchen Cabinet products manufactured by Guangzhou Oupai Kitchen Cabinet Enterprise Co., Ltd. as guangdong famous brand products, valid from October 2008 to September 2011; 3. In February 2008, the registered trademark "Opai" no. 1128213 was confirmed as a famous trademark of Guangdong Province by the Guangdong Famous Trademark Recognition Committee, whose recognized commodities include sideboards, storage racks and dish cabinets; 4, in December 2012, China building decoration Association kitchen and sanitation engineering committee evaluation guangdong Opai household Group Co., Ltd. for the 2012 Chinese kitchen and sanitation 100, the overall kitchen leading enterprises 10; 5. In September 2013, Guangzhou Municipal People's Government awarded Guangdong Opai Furniture Group Co., LTD the 2012 Guangzhou Mayor quality Award; 6. On December 28, 2014, according to the evaluation of Brand Watch magazine, the case of "Scientific Planning of Opai's strategy of leading the second Revolution of the furniture Industry" of Opai Household Group Co., Ltd. was selected as the Silver Award of brand Marketing Case of the year 2014 in China. 7. In January 2015, Guangdong Furniture Industry Federation and Guangdong Furniture Chamber of Commerce awarded the plaintiff as one of the top 10 most valuable brands and top 10 innovative enterprises in the field of Guangdong furniture in 2014.

    1. Tax payment certificates issued by the State Tax Bureau of Baiyun District, Guangzhou city respectively from 2013 to 2015 prove that the plaintiff paid more than 140 million yuan in 2013, 150 million yuan in 2014 and 190 million yuan in 2015; 2. 2. The local tax bureau of Baiyun District, Guangzhou city has issued a notice certifying that the plaintiff paid over 78 million yuan of tax in 2014 and 62 million yuan of tax in 2015.

    According to the word no. 354 (2016) lai FengCheng card people "notarial deed" records, May 28, 2015, guangzhou know ren certified public accountants issued by the guangzhou special audit report on the identification of famous trademarks, to prove the plaintiff to use 12088111 registered trademark "OPPEIN" and no. 1128213 registered trademark "European" sells goods and service, 2012 annual business income is 2.4486955 billion yuan, net income of 185.0055 million yuan; In 2013, the operating income was 3366,619,600 yuan, and the net profit was 304,021,600 yuan. In 2014, the company realized an operating income of RMB 40,5975,700 yuan and a net profit of RMB 354,747,100 yuan.

    According to "Notarial Certificate" (2016), No. 355 of Laifeng City Certificate, the plaintiff carried out continuous publicity on "Opai" brand through CCTV and Hunan TV to prove that "Opai" brand has been widely known by notarization and its brand value is very high. Word no. 356 (2016), FengCheng card people "notarial deed", according to July 20, 2013, the plaintiff signed with wen-juan jiang advertising contract agreement, invite jiang wenli for "European" brand cabinets, wardrobe, sanitary ware, advertising performance for the above mentioned products, two years, performance service compensation of 1.5 million yuan; In addition, the plaintiff submitted newspapers and magazines such as Linchuan Evening News, Shenzhen Special Zone Daily, Ruili Home Furnishing, etc. to prove that the plaintiff continuously propagated the "Opai" brand through print media.

    3. The relevant situation of the plaintiff's claim for the defendant's infringement.

    On December 30, 2015, Yang Jinchao, an agent entrusted by Shandong Changping Law Firm, applied to Fengcheng Notary Office in Laiwu city, Shandong Province for evidence preservation, and under the supervision of the notary, purchased products on Taobao.com with the computer connected to the Notary office. The notary Office shall form a working record according to Yang Jinzhao's online shopping and the acquisition and appraisal process of the product, and issue the Notarial Certificate (2016) No. 79 of Laifengcheng Certificate. The "notarial deed" records: 1, on December 30, 2015, Yang today search "taobao" shopkeeper called "opie sanitary ware co., LTD." the shop "" opie sanitary ware enterprise stores, site at" https://shop126183415.taobao.com ", the shop display "company name: shenzhen emperor supreme sanitary ware co., LTD., type of business: brand, and store time: 2015-07-03", shop front page shows "sales 2 a total of 9 pieces of baby"; 2. Yang Jinzhao bought a key word in the store, which is "Oupai Bathroom Facial makeup flush toilet super siphonic silent deodorant nano intelligent cleaning water-saving toilet 54". On the product picture, there are "Linpus Facial makeup Series Oupai Bathroom" and "Oupai Bathroom is genuine and genuine"; After payment, the production order number is 151XXX38, and the nickname on the order is "Opai Sanitary Ware Co., LTD", and the real name is "Shenzhen Emperor Supreme Sanitary Ware Co., LTD"; 3. On January 6, 2016, under the supervision of the notary, Yang came to the sales department of "Financial resources and Logistics" 100 meters east to the south of Huaguan Bridge, South Wenhua South Road, Laicheng District, Laiwu City, and picked up a package of goods and a logistics document, the tracking number is 318XXX7. 4, please take the above items back to notarization notarial personnel, out of the photograph, the picture shown on the packaging of goods, "opie sanitary ware co., LTD. (" address is" 130 China paradise street, sheung wan, Hong Kong heng building front seat 11 buildings ", and a design of facebook, facebook, "manufacturer: chaoan town charm of ancient alley ceramics factory address: guangdong chaozhou north area" and other words; There is a white toilet seat with the word LIANPU beside its flush button. The notary sealed the goods and stamped the seal of Fengcheng Notary Office in Laiwu city, Shandong Province, and handed them over to Yang Jin Zhao for safekeeping; 5. On January 6, 2016, under the supervision of the notary staff, Yang Jinzhao logged on to "Taobao.com" using the computer connected with the notary office, confirmed the receipt of the toilet with the key word of "Oup Bathroom Face toilet, super syringe-type, quiet, odor-proof, nano, intelligent and clean water-saving toilet 54", and chatted with the shop seller; The seller's assistant confirms that the goods are issued by the store through the logistics information and the pictures of the goods.

    In the trial, the plaintiff confirmed that the defendant's unfair competition behavior is that the defendant Emperor Supreme Company used the words "Opai Sanitary Ware Co., LTD., Opai Sanitary ware" in a large amount in the publicity and products of its taobao store (" Opai Sanitary Ware Enterprise store "). These ACTS are both trademark infringement and unfair competition.

    Iv. Others.

    The emperor sovereign company submitted the following evidence: 1, no. 16017648 "words" registered trademark information printouts, commodity categories for 35 categories, including outdoor advertising, hr management consulting, business window layout, the applicant is a saint treasure vehicle manufacturing co., LTD, in wuxi city special period since February 21, 2016, to February 20, 2026, to prove that "European" trademark is not all the plaintiff; 2, (2016) no. 14450 shennan the word "notarial deed", recorded the supreme emperor company entrusted agent of the south than on June 29, 2016, apply to the guangdong province shenzhen nanshan notarization of evidence preservation, the notarial personnel under the supervision of the use of notarization computer, input "https://shop126183415.taobao.com" in the browser's address bar, shows the store name for "facebook shop" sanitary ware enterprises, the company name as "shenzhen emperor supreme sanitary ware co., LTD.", the shopkeeper for "opie sanitary ware co., LTD.", The words "Opi Bathroom" are not shown in the pictures and names of the products sold in the store. Enter "Opai Bathroom enterprise store" in the search bar of "Taobao.com", and the search results "Opai enterprise Store", "Facial makeup bathroom enterprise store", "Honest 888 work clothes" and other results appear, to prove the status quo of the taobao store of the defendant Emperor Supreme Company. The plaintiff Opai Furniture Co., Ltd. does not accept evidence 1 on the grounds that the evidence is printed on the web page; The authenticity of evidence 2 is confirmed, but its relevance is not recognized. It is believed that the notarization is conducted after the plaintiff sues, and the tort of the defendant continues.

    Check again, in order to prove its rights protection reasonable expenses of expenditure, the plaintiff submitted a notary fee bill, the amount of RMB 35,300 yuan.

    Again, the plaintiff listed Opai Sanitary Ware Co., Ltd. as the defendant on the 11th floor of the front block of Hengle Building, 130 Wing Lok Street, Sheung Wan, Hong Kong, and then applied to withdraw all the claims against opai sanitary ware Co., Ltd. before the trial.

    Above fact, there are (2016), word FengCheng card people "notarial deed", (2016) no. 79 lai FengCheng card no: 348-346 people "notarial deed", (2016) lai FengCheng people word "notarial deed", (2016) no. 350 lai FengCheng the word no. 357-352 "notarial deed", "about that," European "trademark for well-known trademark", magazines, newspapers, web printing, (2016) no. 14450 shennan the word "notarial deed" record documented evidence and other evidence and hearing, enough.

    In the court's opinion, the dispute centers on whether the defendants' actions constitute trademark infringement and unfair competition.

    Whether the actions of the two defendants constitute trademark infringement. According to the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China and other relevant provisions, the use of trademarks means the use of trademarks on commodities, commodity packaging or containers, and commodity trading documents, or the use of trademarks in advertising, exhibitions and other commercial activities to identify the sources of commodities. Without the permission of the trademark registrant, used on the same kind of goods with similar trademark registered trademark, or to use its registered trademark in the similar products of the same or similar trademark, easy to cause confusion, as well as sales infringement of a registered trademark of the goods, all is the use of a registered trademark infringement. In this case, the plaintiff obtained the approval and registration of the word trademark "" no. 4378572. The approved use of the trademark is in category 11, including toilet seats, shower equipment, bath basin, bathroom equipment, etc.; The defendant supreme emperor company in its business taobao shop "opie sanitary ware enterprises inn" (https://shop126183415.taobao.com) using "opie bathroom facebook flush toilet super rotation siphon type mute odor-proof nano zhi jie water-saving toilet" 54, "opie bathroom Linpus facebook", "opie bathroom genuine authentic trading with the words" such as propaganda, is to use the trademark of the trademark involved in the sex; Without the plaintiff's permission, the defendant Imperial Supreme Company used the trademark "" similar to the word trademark no. 4378572 on the same kind of goods, which is easy to cause confusion. Its behavior has constituted the infringement of the exclusive right of registered trademark, and it shall bear the corresponding tort liability according to law. As for the defendant Verve ceramics factory, the plaintiff claims that it is the producer of the products involved; But from the point of the available evidence, will be marked on the outer packing of the products involved in the "manufacturer: chaoan town charm of ancient alley ceramics factory address: guangdong chaozhou north area", the producer information verve ceramics factory industrial and commercial registration information is not consistent with that of the accused, the plaintiff's claim for insufficient evidence of the manufacturer involved related claims in accordance with the law does not support.

    Whether the conduct of the two defendants constitutes unfair competition. In the trial, the plaintiff confirmed that the defendant's unfair competition behavior is that the defendant Emperor Supreme Company used the words "Opai Sanitary Ware Co., LTD., Opai Sanitary ware" and other words in the publicity and products of its taobao store (" Opai Sanitary Ware Enterprise store ").

    According to article 2, Paragraph 1 of the Law of the People's Republic of China against Unfair Competition, "In market transactions, business operators shall follow the principles of voluntariness, equality, fairness, honesty and credibility, and abide by recognized business ethics." The court holds that legitimate market competition must be an honest competition conducted by competitors through labor, and that unfair competition constitutes unfair competition by competitors who do not pay labor but improperly use the market results obtained by others to gain competitive advantage. According to the facts found in this case, the plaintiff applied for the registration of trademark No. 1128213 "" on class 20 sideboard goods in 1997, which was recognized as a well-known trademark by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce in 2009. Registered trademark No. 4378572 "" on toilets and other products in 2007; At the same time, according to the plaintiff's "the special audit report on the identification of famous trademarks in guangzhou baiyun district state tax bureau and the guangzhou baiyun district, guangzhou local taxation bureau issued by the tax certificate, the certificate of the China famous brand product of series of honorary certificate, (2016) FengCheng card" in the word no. 356-355 "notarial deed" for the purpose of promotion and the contracts signed and evidence such as newspapers and magazines can be concluded that the plaintiff's business name, size, trademarks have been familiar with by the relevant public, has high visibility. And the defendant emperor supreme company has its own brand and brand, but it is still in its business taobao shop "opie sanitary ware enterprises store" (https://shop126183415.taobao.com, the shopkeeper, "opie sanitary ware co., LTD.") using the "opie bathroom facebook toilet bowl super rotation siphon type mute odor-proof nano zhi jie water-saving toilet" 54, "opie bathroom Linpus facebook", "opie bathroom genuine authentic trading with the words" such as publicity, use close to the plaintiff enterprise name, size, names of taobao shop, the shopkeeper. When the plaintiff's well-known trademark is applied to similar goods, its intention of attaching and free-riding is obvious enough to cause confusion or misidentification of the relevant public. Its behavior violates the principle of good faith that operators should follow in the market competition and constitutes unfair competition.

    To sum up, the behavior of the defendant Imperial Supreme Company constitutes unfair competition and trademark infringement to the plaintiff, and it shall bear the legal responsibility to stop the infringement and compensate for economic losses according to law. Therefore, the court supports the plaintiff's demand that the defendant Imperial Supreme Company immediately stop the unfair competition behavior of using the word "Opai" in its online store for publicity. Because the plaintiff did not submit evidence to prove that the defendant supreme emperor company during the period of infringement for infringing the interests, or the loss during this period due to the infringement of, so we consider the plaintiff commodity awareness, the defendant factors such as the nature of the infringement, reasonable expenses activist, has decided the defendant supreme emperor company to compensate the plaintiff economic loss of 80000 yuan, rights reasonable costs 20000 yuan. The plaintiff's application to withdraw the relevant lawsuit of Opai Sanitary Ware Co., Ltd. is a punishment of its legal rights and interests. The court gives permission, and the relevant lawsuit of Opai sanitary ware Co., Ltd. will not be handled according to law. The plaintiff demands that the defendant Imperial Supreme Company immediately stop the sale of toilet utensils and other sanitary wares marked with "Opai Sanitary wares Co., LTD", and the court rejects the lawsuit based on insufficient basis. As for the defendant Shenyun ceramics factory, it has been discussed before that the plaintiff's claim that it is the producer of the products involved is not sufficient evidence, and the relevant litigation claims are not supported according to law.

    To sum up, in accordance with article 2 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China, Article 1 of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on Certain Issues concerning the Application of Law in The Trial of Civil Cases involving Unfair Competition, and Article 64, Paragraph 1, of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the judgment is as follows:

    1. The defendant, Shenzhen Emperor Supreme Sanitary Ware Co., Ltd. immediately stopped the unfair competition behavior of using "Opai" in its online store for publicity;

    Ii. The defendant, Shenzhen Emperor Supreme Sanitary Ware Co., LTD., shall compensate the plaintiff, Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD., for the economic loss of RMB 80,000 yuan and reasonable expenses of RMB 20,000 yuan within 10 days from the effective date of this judgment;

    3. Other claims of the plaintiff, Opai Home Furnishing Group Co., LTD., were rejected.

    If the pecuniary obligation is not performed within the period specified in this judgment, the interest on the debt for the delayed period shall be doubled in accordance with article 253 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.

    The case acceptance fee is RMB 13,800, which shall be borne by the defendant Shenzhen Emperor Supreme Sanitary Ware Co., LTD.

    If you are not satisfied with this judgment, you may, within 15 days from the date of serving the judgment, file an appeal to this court, and make copies according to the number of the other party, and appeal to the Intermediate People's Court of Shenzhen, Guangdong province.

    Chief Judge Huang Juanmin

    People's Juror Ma Hong

    People's juror CAI Baoni

    May 8, 2017

    Clerk Yap Chi-lin

    Additional Law:

    Law of the People's Republic of China against Unfair Competition

    Article 5 A business operator shall not engage in market transactions by the following improper means to the detriment of competitors:

    (1) counterfeiting another person's registered trademark;

    (2) to use, without authorization, the names, packaging or decoration peculiar to a well-known commodity, or to use names, packaging or decoration similar to that of a well-known commodity, so as to cause confusion with the well-known commodity of another person and cause buyers to mistake the well-known commodity for the well-known commodity;

    (3) to use, without authorization, the enterprise name or name of another person, thus causing it to be mistaken for another person's goods;

    (4) forging or falsely using on a commodity quality marks such as authentication marks, famousand superior marks, forging the origin of a commodity or making false and misleading representations concerning the quality of the commodity.

    Article 20 If a business operator, in violation of the provisions of this Law, causes damage to the injured business operator, it shall be liable for compensation for the damage. If it is difficult to calculate the losses of the injured business operator, the amount of compensation shall be the profits made by the infringer during the period of infringement due to the infringement. It shall also bear the reasonable expenses paid by the injured operator for investigating the ACTS of unfair competition in which the operator infringes upon its lawful rights and interests.

    Where the lawful rights and interests of the infringed business operator are harmed by ACTS of unfair competition, it may bring a suit in a people's court.

    Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Some Issues concerning the Application of Law in The Trial of Civil Cases of Unfair Competition

    Article 1 Commodities that have a certain market popularity within the territory of China and are known to the relevant public shall be recognized as "well-known commodities" as provided for in Article 5 (2) of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. When a people's court recognizes a well-known commodity, it shall make a comprehensive judgment taking into account such factors as the time of sale, the region of sale, the amount of sale and the object of sale of the commodity, the duration, degree and geographical scope of any publicity, as well as the protection of the well-known commodity. The plaintiff shall bear the burden of proof for the market popularity of his goods.

    Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

    Article 64 A party has the duty to provide evidence in support of his claim.

    The people's court shall investigate and collect evidence that the parties and their agents AD litem are unable to collect by themselves for objective reasons, or that the people's court deems necessary for the trial of the case.

    The people's court shall examine and verify evidence in a comprehensive and objective manner in accordance with legal procedures.