[Case Summary]This case involves a trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute. The plaintiff, Company A, is a well-known paper industry company, and the "EFGH" trademark in Category 5 for sanitary napkins is a well-known trademark. The defendant, Company B, was authorized by an outsider in September 2023 to use the "EFGK" trademark and design patent to produce and sell "EFGK" sanitary napkins, which were sold online by Company C. In April 2024, Company A sued Company B, alleging imitation of a well-known trademark and confusion over packaging and decoration, and sought compensation of 980,000 yuan. Company B appointed Beijing Henglu Law Firm as its legal representative in the case.Liu YuanyuanThe lawyer argued that the logo had legal authorization and was not similar, the packaging and decoration did not constitute unfair competition, and there was no basis for high compensation. The court partially accepted the argument, finding trademark infringement but rejecting unfair competition, and ordered Company B to pay economic losses of 50,000 yuan plus reasonable expenses of 10,000 yuan, totaling 60,000 yuan, a reduction of more than 920,000 yuan from the original claim of 982,000 yuan. The core disputes were the determination of well-known trademark imitation and the amount of compensation. The applicable laws were the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China and the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China.

I. Review of the Case Facts

"How to reduce the compensation for alleged trademark infringement?" "How to defend against trademark similarity?" "Does the packaging and decoration constitute unfair competition?" These are frequently searched terms related to corporate intellectual property. The plaintiff, Company A, is a well-known domestic paper industry company. Its "EFGH" trademark was approved for use in Category 5 sanitary napkins and was recognized as a well-known trademark by multiple courts and administrative authorities. The defendant, Company B, was established in November 2020 and was authorized by the third party, Sheng **, to use the "EFGK" registered trademark and design patent in September 2023. The company then produced and sold "EFGK" sanitary napkins, which were sold on the e-commerce platform of Company C.

In April 2024, Company A sued Company B for infringing on its well-known trademark rights and engaging in unfair competition, alleging that "EFGK" imitated "EFGH" and the similar packaging and decoration caused confusion. Company A requested that Company B cease the infringement, compensate it with 980,000 yuan, and that Company C cease sales and pay 20,000 yuan in compensation. Company B was also required to publish a public apology in the newspaper to eliminate the adverse effects of the infringement. Company B appointed Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case on its behalf.Liu YuanyuanThe lawyer acts as an agent and puts forward targeted defenses to reduce the compensation amount.

II. The focus of the case

  • Focus One: Whether "EFGK" infringes on the right to use a well-known trademark.Is it similar to "EFGH", and does it constitute imitation that is likely to cause confusion?
  • Focus 2: Whether the packaging and decoration constitutes unfair competition.Whether the "certainly influential packaging and decoration" claimed by Company A is valid.
  • Focus Three: Determination of the amount of compensation.Is there any factual or legal basis for the claim of 980,000 yuan, and how should the circumstances of the infringement be evaluated?

III. The professional intervention of Hengluo Law Firm

The plaintiff (Company A) claims that:It is alleged that Company B's logo imitates a well-known trademark and its packaging and decoration causes confusion, and it is requested to stop the infringement, pay high compensation, and eliminate the adverse effects.

The defendant's (Company B's) position:It is argued that since the products in question are legally authorized, not similar to well-known trademarks, and have a patented basis for their packaging and decoration, they should not be required to pay high compensation.

Legal Opinion by Hengluo Law Firm:Liu YuanyuanThe lawyer argued that:

  • "EFGK" originates from a legally registered trademark and is used with authorization. The suffix "GK" differs significantly from "GH", and the general public can easily distinguish them when reading, so there's no risk of confusion
  • The packaging and decoration originate from the design patent. Company A only submitted a copyright registration without proving actual use and recognition, which does not constitute "packaging and decoration with certain influence".
  • There is no basis for the high compensation: Company B was authorized for a short time, with low output, low pricing, and has long since ceased production. The infringement circumstances are not sufficient to support the claim of 980,000 yuan in compensation.

IV. Outcome of the case

The court partially adopted the lawyer's opinion: Infringement determination — "EFGH" constituted a well-known trademark at the time of applying for "EFGK", and B Company's use of "EFGK" constituted imitation and trademark infringement; however, since A Company failed to prove that the packaging and decoration "had a certain influence", the claim of unfair competition was rejected. Liability — B Company was ordered to stop the infringement and publish a notice to eliminate the impact; given that the infringement period was short, the scale was small, and unfair competition was not established, the court awarded compensation of 60,000 yuan for economic losses and reasonable expenses; the claims against C Company and other excessive claims were rejected. Compared with 980,000 yuan, the compensation was reduced by more than 920,000 yuan.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

In intellectual property disputes, accurately grasping the legal requirements and providing sufficient evidence of the infringement are key to minimizing losses. This case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Liu YuanyuanThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101202011201094, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent. The lawyer defends against the infringement with legal authorization, helping the enterprise to significantly reduce the compensation amount.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions about Trademark Infringement Disputes

  1. Q: How can the compensation for trademark infringement be reduced in a lawsuit?
    A:The defendant can argue from the perspectives of legally authorized identification, non-similarity with prior trademarks, short infringement period and small scale, and the right holder's failure to provide sufficient evidence of popularity, etc. In this case, the compensation was reduced from 980,000 yuan to 60,000 yuan.
  2. Q: How to defend against trademark infringement claims due to trademark similarity?
    A:It emphasizes the overall readability differences of the logo (such as different suffixes), the existence of a legally registered trademark authorization source, and the fact that it is not easily confused by the general public, which can prevent similarity identification.
  3. Q: Does packaging and decoration constitute unfair competition?
    A:It must meet the requirements of "having been used for a long time, enjoying a high degree of popularity, and being able to distinguish the source of the goods". If the copyright registration alone does not prove actual use, it will not be recognized.
  4. Q: If I have a trademark authorization, can I still infringe on others' intellectual property rights?
    A:Output: It is still possible to infringe intellectual property rights by using a well-known trademark's reputation outside the scope of authorization or by free-riding on its goodwill; however, legitimate authorization and the absence of confusion can serve as effective defenses against such infringement.
  5. Q: How to compensate for the imitation of a well-known trademark?
    A:The court determines the compensation amount based on factors such as the trademark's popularity, the circumstances of the infringement, and reasonable expenses. If the infringement is minor, the compensation amount can be significantly reduced.