China Net Finance and Economics, November 4 (reporter Guo Shuai) "Beijing MUJI" v. "Japan MUJI" commercial defamation dispute case ushered in the first-instance judgment results. The Chaoyang District People's Court of Beijing Municipality held that "Nippon MUJI" constituted an act of commercial defamation, and ordered it to compensate "Beijing MUJI" for 400,000 yuan and eliminate the impact within the corresponding scope.
Source: Beijing Court Trial Information Network
According to the judgment no. 59143 of the case number (2020) Jing 0105 Min Chu, Beijing Cotton Field Textile Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Cotton Field Company") believes that since November 10, 2019, the two defendants, including Liangpin Project Co., Ltd. (Japan MUJI), issued statements in Tmall's "MUJI Official Flagship Store" and offline physical stores, saying that "other companies have preemptively registered the 'MUJI' trademark". Combined with the context of the statements issued by the two defendants, such as The Good Product Project Co., Ltd., it is enough to cause the public to equate the above-mentioned "other companies" with the Cotton Field Company, believing that the Cotton Field Company has preemptively registered the "MUJI" trademark of the two defendants, such as the Good Products Project Co., Ltd., and is an outlaw, rather than the real victim of the two civil cases.
Cotton Field Company further filed a lawsuit with the court to order the two defendants of Good Products Project Co., Ltd. to jointly compensate Cotton Field Company for the economic losses caused by commercial defamation of 3 million yuan, to compensate 100,000 yuan for reasonable expenses paid for stopping the infringement, and to require the two defendants including Good Products Project co., Ltd. to eliminate the impact within the corresponding scope.
According to the judgment, because it was believed that the use of "MUJI" on the production and sale of blankets, bedspreads, mattresses, bath towels, face towels, duvet covers, pillow cases and other goods produced and sold by the Two Defendants constituted trademark infringement, Cotton Field Company and Beijing MUJI Investment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Beijing MUJI") jointly acted as plaintiffs and on April 29, 2015, the Two Defendants of Liangpin Project Co., Ltd. were informed to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court, requiring the two defendants, including Liangpin Project Co., Ltd., to bear the burden of stopping the infringement and compensating for losses. Eliminate legal liabilities such as impact.
On December 25, 2017, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court previously rendered the (2015) Jingzhimin Chuzi No. 763 and 764 Civil Judgments, finding that the trademark infringement of the two defendants, including Liangpin Project Co., Ltd., was established, and ordering the two defendants, including Liangpin Project Co., Ltd., to bear the legal liability for stopping the infringement, eliminating the impact, and compensating for losses. Brick-and-mortar stores in mainland China issued a three-day statement to neutralize the impact. On November 4, 2019, the Beijing Municipal Higher People's Court rendered the (2018) Jingmin Zhong No. 172 and No. 173 Civil Judgments, upholding the original judgment of the Beijing Intellectual Property Court.
The Chaoyang District People's Court of Beijing Municipality held that "preemptive registration" in the Trademark Law already contains a negative judgment of wrongdoing. Under this premise, the two defendants, including Liangpin Project Co., Ltd., alleged that Cotton Field Company had "squatted" to register trademarks, which was not in line with objective facts, but also a derogatory judgment. The public statements actually issued by the two defendants, such as the Good Products Project of the Company, objectively contradicted the facts, and then actually derogated the goodwill of the cotton field company.
The Chaoyang District People's Court of Beijing Municipality finally ordered Liangpin Project Co., Ltd. and MUJI (Shanghai) Commercial Co., Ltd. to compensate Beijing MUJI for economic losses of RMB300,000 and reasonable expenses to stop the infringement of RMB100,000, and publicly published a written statement in muji's official flagship store" and physical stores in mainland China to eliminate the impact of the commercial defamation involved in the case.
(Editor-in-charge: Jia Yujing)