According to the company's information, Suzhou Paperstack Network Technology Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Nuandien Network Technology Co., Ltd. have formally sued Zulong (Tianjin) Technology Co., Ltd. and Huai'an Zulong Technology Co., Ltd. on the grounds of "trademark infringement disputes", and the third party in the case is Shenzhen Tencent Computer System Co., Ltd.
The case was filed on April 2 and the first instance will be heard on June 5.
At the moment, there is no official information about the specific details of the case.
However, according to Internet information, the case may stem from the fact that "when searching for products such as "Shining Nuan Nuan" and "Miracle Nuan Nuan" on WeChat, Baidu and other platforms, Zulong's "In the Name of Shining" will appear in the search results.
The above images are all from the network
The materials in this kind of video and full-width card advertisement are indeed "In the Name of Shining", and the teahouse has not noticed the problem of material theft. However, there is a very obvious misalignment in the keyword orientation of search engines, and product names such as "Shine Nuan Nuan" have already been registered as the intellectual property rights of Suzhou Paperstack in Class 35 (advertising sales).
This type of trademark covers advertising (involving outdoor advertising, advertising design, advertising planning, advertising promotion, writing of advertising scripts, advertising agencies, etc.) and business administration assistance (business management assistance, business information, public opinion polls, providing business information through websites, etc.) service groups.
However, there is no clear distinction between the two in the above-mentioned advertisement, which is likely to cause the element of "confusion" as defined in Article 57, Paragraph 2 of the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China.
According to the commercial mechanism of bidding search advertising, the search service provider has a direct relationship with the occurrence of this situation, which may be the reason why Tencent became the third party in this case.
According to the Guidelines for the Trial of Civil Disputes over Trademark Infringement by the High People's Court of Jiangsu Province (revised in December 2020) issued by the Jiangsu Provincial High People's Court, there are two types of so-called "trademark infringement" civil disputes: one is trademark infringement cases, that is, cases in which a trademark identical or similar to a registered trademark is used on the same or similar goods or services without permission; The other category is the conflict of rights between registered trademarks, between registered trademarks and trade names, trade names, product packaging, decoration, domain names, APP names and other commercial marks.
In the light of the Internet information mentioned above, the circumstances of this case should fall into the first category.
The specific situation needs to be further verified after the first instance hearing.