current

September 28, the U.S. International Ltd. v. Nike Shoes Co., Ltd. Hefei BAICHENG court case, Nike believes in the Honest shoe business sector seized counterfeit Nike shoes Nike infringed the registered trademark, Honest request the court to order the company to stop infringement, compensate for the losses as high as 30 million yuan. Nike: selling "fake" infringement Nike should pay 30 million publicDivision attorney in the trial that the November 24, 2006, the city Luyang District Branch Trade and Industry Bureau under reported in the second floor of an Honest shoe counter, seized counterfeit "Nike" 33 pairs, then has sold 6 pairs. Seized all the shoes currently sealed by the business sector.
Nike believes that Honest company as a franchise business footwear products, the objective should be to know "Nike" brand, and the larger company, the obligation on the counter product management and supervision. However, the infringing goods in his store there, Honest companies have a subjective liability. At the same time, these products are unified through the cash register Honest, issuing sales list, Sale invoices and other sales, Pak Shing should bear the primary responsibility for the infringement. The plaintiff demanded the company immediately stop the infringing act Honest, and a public apology in the media, while compensation for 300,000 yuan.
Honest: the responsibility from the rental counter to worry cause of action for the Nike and the claims, Pak Shing company first apologized, admitted this is a management loopholes. But then raised, the plaintiff sued the defendant, the principal is wrong.
Since June 20, 2006, Jin Cheng a hundred companies have signed with the lease contract, rental Huaihe Road Pedestrian Street, Pak Shing counter shoe store on the second floor of 10 square meters, followed by the business sector in the investigation of the infringing goods counter. AlthoughHowever, Honest companies to adopt a unified cash register, invoiced sales model, but the company's violations of the counter completely unaware of the consequences of infringement should be a personal commitment by the Jin. The defendant attorney made, 30 million have no legal basis for compensation, the amount is much higher than the subject of prosecution Moreover, Honest company in Hefei is only within the small-scale footwear sales companies, such as to apologize, in Hefei, the local newspapers, do not increase their influence.
Judge: Although counterfeiting and punished both uncompromising, but the Hefei Intermediate People's Court case the judge said the contractor, as per the Unity of the cash register honesty,Ticket issued by way of sale of shoes, Jin Moucheng package for the behavior of the counter selling fake products, without the knowledge of a hundred honest to say that will not be admissible in court. But Nike's request for compensation is too high. The trademark claim is only against the property, not involving goodwill. Court might have sealed the false identification of quality shoes, and then decide the amount of compensation.
But for now the market's "fake" sale of goods act, should be severely punished, a warning to others, it will be fair and honest measure of the amount of compensation a hundred, to both the market success of mediation and business norms warning.
When the trial ended, the two sides agentLawyers agreed to mediation.