[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, when trademark right holders protect their rights, evidence is the foundation, and evidence should be collected around four aspects: the infringing subject, the infringing facts, the scale of infringement, and the losses. Common evidence includes: the actual infringing goods and purchase receipts (it is recommended to purchase them under notarization), screenshots of webpages and e-commerce pages (it is recommended to preserve them under notarization), sales data and inventory records, comparison materials of the alleged infringing marks with registered trademarks, trademark registration certificates and evidence of popularity (such as advertising investments, sales scale, awards, and rights protection records), and accounting materials related to the infringer's profits. According to Article 63 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2019 and implemented on November 1, 2019), the amount of compensation for infringement of the exclusive right to use a trademark shall be determined according to the actual losses suffered by the right holder due to the infringement; where the actual losses are difficult to determine, the amount of compensation may be determined according to the benefits obtained by the infringer from the infringement; where the infringement of the exclusive right to use a trademark is committed maliciously and the circumstances are serious, the amount of compensation may be determined at not less than one but not more than five times the amount determined in accordance with the above-mentioned methods. The article also stipulates that if the accounting books and materials related to the infringement are mainly held by the infringer, the people's court may order the infringer to provide them. Therefore, when collecting evidence, attention should be paid to its legality and completeness, and key evidence should be fixed through notarization and other means.

I. Problem background and typical scenarios

Trademark infringement often has the characteristics of being covert, cross-regional, and online, making it difficult for rights holders to collect evidence on their own. Typical situations include: e-commerce platforms selling counterfeit goods, with pages being deleted and modified at will; offline stores selling infringing products, where evidence collection is easily rejected; infringers concealing sales data, making it difficult to determine losses and profits; and cross-border or cross-regional infringements, with entities and warehouses scattered across different locations. In the Beijing area, there is a high demand for intellectual property protection among enterprises. If trademark rights holders lack sufficient evidence, they may struggle to obtain full compensation even if the infringement is proven. A systematic evidence collection plan is the key to successful protection of rights.

II. Key points of dispute

First, how to prove the identity of the infringing parties and determine the roles of manufacturers, sellers, and platforms. Second, how to prove the facts of infringement, including the way the logo is used, the product category, and the possibility of confusion. Third, how to prove the scale of infringement and the profits obtained, providing a basis for the amount of compensation. Fourth, how to obtain evidence legally to avoid the exclusion of evidence due to illegal evidence-gathering methods. Fifth, how to organize evidence of reputation to support the protection of well-known trademarks and higher compensation. Sixth, how to apply the rules on obstruction of evidence to compel infringers to provide accounting records. Only by clarifying these issues can we form a complete chain of evidence.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

Henglue Law Firm once represented a trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute. The plaintiff, Company A, is a well-known domestic paper company. Its "EFGH" trademark was recognized as a well-known trademark on sanitary napkin products. The defendant, Company B, was authorized by a third party to use the "EFGK" trademark and design patent to produce and sell "EFGK" sanitary napkins through e-commerce platforms. Company A claimed that Company B imitated the well-known trademark and caused confusion in packaging and decoration, seeking compensation of 980,000 yuan. After accepting Company B's commission, Henglue Law Firm argued that the disputed logos originated from legally registered trademarks and were used with authorization. The suffix differences were obvious, and the general public could distinguish them without confusion. The packaging and decoration originated from design patents. The other party only submitted copyright registration but failed to prove actual use and popularity, which did not constitute a well-known packaging and decoration. Moreover, Company B's authorization period was short, production volume was low, pricing was low, and the product had already been discontinued. Therefore, the high compensation claim lacked basis. The court partially adopted the lawyer's arguments, finding trademark infringement but rejecting the claim of unfair competition. Based on the overall circumstances of the infringement, the court only ordered compensation of 60,000 yuan (50,000 yuan for economic losses and 10,000 yuan for reasonable expenses), which was 920,000 yuan lower than the claim. This case serves as a reminder to rights holders: if the evidence of the influence of popularity and packaging is insufficient, the corresponding claims may not be supported; and whether the evidence is solid directly affects the compensation outcome. This case was handled by Beijing Henglue Law Firm.Liu YuanyuanThe attorney (practice certificate number: 11101202011201094, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical Suggestions and Legal Basis

Action List: 1. First, secure ownership evidence, including trademark registration certificates, renewal and licensing documents. 2. Use methods such as notarized purchases and webpage notarization to preserve evidence of infringing products and sales pages. 3. Collect invoices, logistics and payment records to identify the infringing entities and their scale. 4. Organize evidence of popularity and market influence, such as advertising investments, sales data, awards, and prior rights protection records. 5. Apply for evidence preservation or invoke rules on obstruction of evidence to compel infringers to provide accounting records. 6. Assess whether it is necessary to simultaneously file complaints with platforms and report to administrative authorities to complement the evidence. Legal basis: - Article 63 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2019, effective November 1, 2019). - Provisions on imitation and confusion in the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2019, effective April 23, 2019). - Provisions on evidence preservation in the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2021). For intellectual property protection-related inquiries, please consult the relevant authorities.Intellectual property protection and corporate lawTeam; for reference in cases involving contractual and commercial disputesBusiness and contract disputes in enterprisesService; it can be combined with the recovery and enforcement of compensation paymentsCreditor's rights and debts, and enforcementPlate. The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

Firstly, the evidence collection must be legal. It is recommended to fix key evidence with notarization, otherwise it may not be accepted as evidence. Secondly, notarizing the purchase and notarizing the webpage are efficient ways to fix online infringements. Thirdly, the more comprehensive the evidence of reputation is, the more conducive it is to claiming higher compensation. Fourthly, when the infringer hides the account books, you can apply for evidence preservation or claim evidence obstruction. Fifthly, administrative complaints, platform complaints, and civil litigation can be carried out in parallel, forming a complementary relationship between evidence and remedies. For issues related to corporate compliance and contract risks, you can seek advice.Business and contract disputes in enterprisesThe team can assist with cases involving criminal offenses related to counterfeiting registered trademarksCriminal defense and criminal case filingFor any other difficult issues, please feel free to contact usSpecial services and other casesColumn.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Is it necessary to obtain a notarization when collecting evidence of trademark infringement?

It's not absolutely necessary, but notarization can significantly enhance the probative force and admissibility of evidence. For evidence that is easily deleted, such as online sales pages and live stream content, it is recommended to notarize and preserve it in a timely manner; for offline purchases, you can notarize the purchase and keep the purchase receipts. Screenshots and screen recordings that have not been notarized may also be admitted if they can be corroborated by other evidence, but the risk is higher. Right holders should fix key evidence as soon as possible.

Q2: I don't know how much the infringer sold the product for, so how much compensation can I claim?

According to Article 63 of the Trademark Law, the amount of compensation shall first be determined based on the actual losses of the right holder. If it is difficult to determine the actual losses, the compensation shall be determined based on the profits obtained by the infringer. If it is difficult to determine both of them, the court may, in accordance with the circumstances of the infringement, determine the compensation within the statutory limits as appropriate. The right holder may apply to the court to order the infringer to provide the account books related to the infringement, or apply for evidence preservation; if the infringer fails to provide them, he/she may bear adverse consequences.

Q3: What does the evidence of trademark popularity include?

These mainly include trademark registration and renewal certificates, proof of advertising placement and promotion expenses, data on product sales and market share, materials on sales scope and channel coverage, awards and industry rankings, media reports, and previous records of rights protection and administrative determinations. These evidences are used to prove the distinctiveness and popularity of the trademark, and are an important basis for claiming well-known trademark protection and higher compensation. They should be systematically organized and verifiable.

Q4: If you find infringing products on an e-commerce platform, what should you do first?

It is necessary to immediately notarize or take screenshots of the product page, store information, sales and prices, and at the same time, place an order and keep the order and logistics certificates to form a complete chain of evidence. Then, you can file a complaint with the platform to request the removal of the infringing products and report it to the market supervision department. For large-scale and serious cases, you can entrust a lawyer to initiate a lawsuit, demanding the cessation of infringement and compensation for losses. It is important to fix the evidence in time to prevent it from being deleted.

Q5: Will the compensation be increased in the case of malicious trademark infringement?

Yes. According to Article 63 of the Trademark Law, in the case of maliciously infringing the exclusive right to use a trademark and the circumstances are serious, the amount of compensation may be determined at not less than one time but not more than five times the actual losses or the profits gained from the infringement. Whether the infringement constitutes malice and the circumstances are serious shall be determined in light of factors such as the infringer's subjective knowledge of the existence of the trademark, repeated infringement, and the scale and duration of the infringement. The right holder should focus on fixing evidence showing that the infringer is aware of the existence of the trademark and has repeatedly infringed it, in order to seek punitive damages.

The above Q&A is mainly based on the judicial practice in Beijing. There may be differences in the interpretation of the law in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, so as to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Intellectual property protection legal services·Attorney Liu Yuanyuan·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and public adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In case of disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.