(Zhang Hanwen Photography)
China Times (www.chinatimes.net.cn) reporter Huang Xingli trainee reporter Zhang Hanwen reported in Beijing
In addition to endless commercial civil disputes, MUJI's troubles in China are far more than that.
On November 4, the Beijing Court Trial Information Network updated and released two civil dispute judgments of two "MUJI" companies. They are disputes over commercial defamation and trademark infringement. The plaintiffs represented THE JAPANESE COMPANY GOOD PRODUCTS PROJECT CO., LTD. (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS "MUJI PROJECT") AND BEIJING MUJI CO., LTD. (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS "BEIJING MUJI") RESPECTIVELY.
In these two disputes, Liangpin Project and Beijing MUJI won and lost each other: in the commercial defamation dispute, Beijing Cotton Field Textile Co., Ltd. (the parent company of Beijing MUJI Company) sued Liangpin Project Co., Ltd. and MUJI (Shanghai) Commercial Co., Ltd. for commercial defamation and won 400,000 yuan, while in another trademark infringement dispute over pillow products, Beijing MUJI party constituted an infringement of the exclusive right to use the registered trademark of Liangpin Project.
In recent years, with the continuous litigation of the two "MUJI" lawsuits, the life of the Good Product Project in China has become more and more difficult.
The dispute between the two "MUJI" continued
In the two disputes recently disclosed, The Good Products Project and Beijing MUJI have won and lost each other.
Among them, in the "Commercial Defamation Dispute Case", Tianyan Cha app showed that the first-instance legal documents of the first instance of the commercial defamation dispute between Beijing Cotton Field Textile Co., Ltd. and MUJI (Shanghai) Commercial Co., Ltd. and Liangpin Project were published, and the trial court was the Chaoyang District People's Court of Beijing Municipality.
According to the documents, the plaintiff, Cotton Field Company, claimed that the two defendants, such as The Good Product Project, fabricated and disseminated false information about the "preemptive registration" of its "Muji Liangpin" trademark of The Cotton Field Company, causing the relevant public to mistakenly recognize the "Muji Liangpin" towels, quilts and other commodities of the Cotton Field Company as copycat goods, causing losses to the Cotton Field Company, and its behavior constituted commercial slander.
At trial, the court held that the public statements issued by the two defendants, including the Good Product Project, objectively contradicted the facts, and thus actually derogated the goodwill of the cotton field company. The plaintiff's claim that the defendant constituted a commercial defamation act had a factual and legal basis. The final judgment resulted that the defendant Liangpin Project and MUJI (Shanghai) Commercial Co., Ltd. jointly compensated the plaintiff, Beijing Cotton Field Textile Co., Ltd., for economic losses and expenses totaling RMB400,000 to stop the infringement.
In another trademark infringement dispute, the court agreed to part of the claims of the Good Products Project.
Judging from the first-instance judgment on trademark infringement between Liangpin Project and Beijing MUJI on November 4, the dispute between the two parties stemmed from the plaintiff Liangpin Project's belief that the defendant Beijing MUJI had sold a product called "neck pillowcase" in the "Muji Official Flagship Store" of Jingdong Mall for suspected trademark infringement, and the plaintiff believed that the product was actually a neck pillow rather than a separate pillowcase.
It is reported that the Good Products Project obtains the trademark registration certificate of the "MUJI" word trademark and approves it for use in pillows and other goods, while the goods approved by the "MUJI" trademark registration certificate of Beijing MUJI include goods such as "pillowcases".
The court held that the defendant's use of the same trademark as the plaintiff's registered trademark on the same kind of goods without permission constituted an infringement of the plaintiff's exclusive right to use the registered trademark, and should bear legal liabilities such as stopping the infringement, eliminating the impact, and compensating for losses in accordance with law.
However, as of press time, there have been no relevant statements on Beijing MUJI. On November 5, a reporter from the China Times called Beijing MUJI for an interview, and the other party hung up the phone when he learned of the reporter's identity.
In fact, the two sides have been in dispute over the trademark of "MUJI" for a long time. According to the court information network, in the past few years, the bids used by the two sides for goods such as pillow cores and mattress cushions have been repeatedly filed in court.
The embarrassment of "muji"
Open Taobao and search for MUJI, and you will find that there are two "MUJI products". The first is the "MUJI Official Flagship Store", with 8.08 million fans, which was opened by MUJI (Shanghai) Commercial Co., Ltd., a subsidiary of the Good Product Project. The other is called "MUJI Flagship Store", with 1.15 million fans, opened by Beijing MUJI.
In fact, the two are not the same. The former was opened in 2005 and licensed by Nippon Good Products Project to sell in China, while the latter was opened in 2011 and registered the "MUJI" trademark that can be used for goods such as wool textiles.
In addition to the distinction between the two "MUJI" online, in offline physical retail, the Good Products Project opens a store with muji MUJI as the logo.
On November 5, the reporter visited the MUJI MUJI shop in Xidan Joy City and found that on the price tags of cotton textiles, bedding and pajamas such as towels and bath towels, there was no "muji MUJI" logo but only the word "muji", but on skin care products and other products, the "MUJI MUJI" logo was printed. An employee who has worked for MUJI for more than three years confirmed that MUJI was indeed plagued by a trademark dispute and was unable to print a logo on the price tags of the above products.
When asked by the reporter whether this situation would affect the sales of these goods, the above-mentioned person explained: "MUJI is the brand name after entering China, called Liangpin Project in Japan, and called 'muji' in the United States." Even if the price tag is not marked, it does not affect the sale of the product. ”
Regarding the dispute between the two parties over trademarks, on November 4, Xu Hao, a lawyer at Beijing Jingshi Law Firm, analyzed in an interview with a reporter from China Times, "Trademarks are intangible assets of enterprises, and their role is to help consumers identify and purchase a product or service, because the nature and quality of the product or service marked by the unique trademark on the product or service meet their needs." If, in order to attach the goodwill of others, others use the registered trademark as the trade name in the enterprise name, causing confusion in the market and violating the principle of good faith, the act constitutes unfair competition. The act of using 'MUJI' in its own business name constitutes an act of unfair competition in itself; from the perspective of consumers, Beijing MUJI's behavior is also suspected of defrauding consumers. ”
In a trademark dispute, which party is the first to make the trademark a well-known trademark and how much effort it has made is also a measure of trademark ownership. "This kind of 'free ride' behavior needs to be stopped in time, otherwise it will discourage enterprises from creating trademarks." Xu Hao finally added.
Constantly reducing the price of muji is still "high cold"
Muji MUJI, which is sought after for its "natural" and "minimalist" styles, has not had a good time in recent years. According to the 2019 fiscal year report of the Good Product Project, there was a dilemma of "increasing revenue without increasing profits", with revenue increasing by 29 billion yen, but net profit fell by nearly one-third.
Public data show that in fiscal 2020, due to the adjustment of the fiscal year division (2020 fiscal year includes the natural year of March 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020) and the impact of the epidemic, the revenue of the good product project was "cut off", and the net profit loss was 18.6 billion yuan. Its first three quarters of fiscal 2021 report shows that it recorded revenue of about 345.1 billion yen and net profit of about 38.4 billion yuan, but it can be seen that its performance has picked up significantly due to changes in fiscal year divisions.
Although the performance of the Good Product Project is gradually recovering, it has shown a clear decline in the Chinese market. According to public information, as of the end of May this year, the number of MUJI stores centered on Shanghai, Beijing and other cities has reached 294, accounting for 30% of the total. However, in fiscal 2019, MUJI only added 19 stores in the Chinese market, which is not the same as the net increase of 30 or 40 stores in fiscal 2016.
Hideo Dozen, president of the Good Product Project, has publicly stated that "the pillar of growth is Japan and the Asian market." At the same time, it is pointed out that "in China, our goods give people the impression of high prices, and the range of customers is not wide enough", muji MUJI will expand the store area and the number of goods in China to obtain new customers.
It is also true that muji MUJI has conducted several rounds of "new pricing" activities since 2014. On November 5, the clerk of MUJI muji introduced to reporters that there will also be new pricing measures this year. "But some products have lowered their pricing and are not as good as they were before." Talking about the impact of price cuts on sales, the person also expressed his doubts.
To be sure, in addition to the price problem, muji MUJI has both "long-term worries" and "near-term worries". Li Yingtao, a senior analyst in the new consumer industry at Analysys, analyzed to reporters, "Muji Muji Haskey's strategic positioning, operating model and management model must be adjusted in addition to supply chain problems. "Whether the supply chain can be improved will have a direct impact on the price of goods." Muji employees told reporters that "more than 80% of the goods in the store are produced in China." Therefore, after removing the impact of tariffs, the supply chain appears to be the most dominant.
In addition, Li Yingtao believes that the core categories of MUJI MUJI are unstable, the product line is getting wider and wider, the economy of scale is insufficient, the operating costs and labor costs are high, and the problems of diverse competitors also need to be solved urgently.
It is true that in the environment of "surrounding" competitors such as Mingchuang Premium, NetEase Yanxuan, xiaomi youpin and so on, the above problems are much more urgent. It is worth mentioning that the new helmsman of the Good Product Project, Dozen Hideo, once served as the head of the European and American business at Uniqlo, and was once regarded as Yanai Masayoshi's successor, so whether Dozen Hideo can use his previous experience to solve the problems facing the Good Product Project has attracted much attention.