The Scope Of Similar Commodities Should Be Dynamically Identified In Trademark Infringement Disputes.

< p > < strong > case > /strong > /p >

< p > plaintiff Exxon Mobil Corp (hereinafter referred to as Mobil Corp) and Mobil Oil Co. Ltd. are the world's top five hundred energy companies.

The Mobil Oil Corp registered the "Mobil" and "MOBIL" trademarks in fourth categories of lubricants and other commodities in March 30, 1983, and pferred the above-mentioned two trademarks to Mobil Corp in March 14, 2002 and May 27, 2011 respectively.

At the beginning of 2010, the two plaintiff found that Zhejiang Cixi Heng Heng car industry Co., Ltd. and Cixi Zhengda Bicycle Industry Co., Ltd. used the "Mobil" trademark on the products of spark plug and shock absorber.

Two the plaintiff appealed to the court and requested the court to confirm that the two trademark constituted a well-known trademark, and ordered two defendants to stop the infringement and compensate for the loss of 500 thousand yuan.

< /p >

< p > < strong > [referee] /strong > < /p >

The intermediate people's Court of the city of /a held that, although the lubricants used for the registration of the infringing goods shock absorber, spark plug and "Mobil" and "MOBIL" registered trademarks belong to different categories of commodities, but from the general nature of the natural attributes of the products, from the general public understanding of the relevant public, they were closely related in terms of consumption, consumption objects and sales channels. They belonged to related commodities. Moreover, two plaintiffs used "Mobil", "MOBIL", "a" href= "//www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp" > trademark "/a" in the lube oil products with high significance and high popularity, which made the relevant public confused and mistaken for the source of commodities, so they should be identified as similar commodities. < p > < a href= "//www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp >" Ningbo "

On the basis of the principle of on-demand identification of well-known trademarks, it is not necessary to identify the two categories of plaintiff's trademark protection.

The two defendant has used the same trademark and similar trademark as the "Mobil" registered trademark without permission. It has constituted a trademark infringement. Therefore, the two defendant decided to stop the infringement on the registered trademark of Mobil and compensate the two plaintiff for a total loss of 500 thousand yuan.

< /p >

< p > the first instance decision of this case has come into force.

< /p >

< p > < strong > [analysis] < /strong > /p >

In the case of < p >, the complaint is "a href=" //www.sjfzxm.com/news/index_c.asp "> infringing /a > commodity shock absorber and spark plug belong to the twelfth category and the seventh category respectively, while the two plaintiff" Mobil "and" MOBIL "registered trademarks are approved for fourth kinds of lubricants and other commodities.

Compared with shock absorber, spark plug and lube oil, they are not competitive goods, but both belong to the motor vehicles. They are all used by motor vehicles. They are all related to motor vehicles. The consumers are also motor vehicle producers, operators or users. The sales channels are basically the same. Therefore, from the general knowledge of the relevant public, they are related commodities.

Moreover, the "Mobil" and "MOBIL" trademarks are of high significance and high popularity. This makes the relevant public feel that there is a specific relationship between the accused's shock absorber, spark plug goods and the two plaintiff's brand lubricants, so the court finds that the two are similar commodities.

< /p >