Louis Vuitton Malletier (LV), a world-renowned enterprise in leather goods, suitcases and shoes, filed the No.241012 trademark 'LV and figure' in 1986, certified on the products of Class 18 including leather and strap bags. The trademark was renewed to January 14, 2026. The No.241012 trademark was recognized as a well-known mark by Shanghai No.2 Intermediate People's Court and Beijing IP court in January and April, 2015 in succession.
In July, 2017, LV authorized an agent to purchase one suitcase and two bags in a shop of a garment mart in Shanghai. LV held that the suitcases and bags for sale in the shop had infringed its trademark right and decoration with some impact and brought the shop owner surnamed Huang to Yangpu District People's Court based on trademark infringement and unfair competition, requesting an injunction and 660,000 yuan in damages and reasonable expenses.
Huang argued that the products on sale are neither the same nor similar with the registered trademark of LV, and leather not the same as figure of the registered trademark, nor it did not constitute infringement. Huang refused to bear the responsibility of compensation on the ground that the accused products were purchased from Gangyi Leather shop and the products' manufacturer Guangzhou Kewang Leather had shown the trademark authorization certificate.
After hearing, Yangpu Court held that the outer surface of the charged products had adopted similar figure with the trademark in a way of unlimited expanded copy. As the trademark enjoyed high popularity, marking the brand and origin of the products, Huang's selling had constituted trademark infringement. Huang attached himself to the reputation of LV subjectively, constituting unfair competition. Therefore, Yangpu Court ordered Huang to compensate LV 30,000 yuan for economic losses.
The disgruntled Huang appealed to Shanghai IP Court, arguing that the wholesaler Gangyi and Kewang were not listed in the parties. Besides, he thought he should not take any compensation responsibility for the fault fact recognition at first instance ruling. Shanghai IP Court held that plaintff was entitled to dispose civil and litigation right within the range of law. It did not generate any impact on judging Huang's selling behavior whether Huang's sellers at higher level were added to be defendants in this case. Hence no impropriety was found.
Shanghai IP Court held further that on the occasion of failing to determine the losses and profits, it was not improper for the first instance ruling Court to impose 30,000 yuan, taking comprehensive consideration of the popularity of LV's trademark and decoration as well as infringement property, range, seriousness and lasting period. In this connection, the Court rejected Huang's appeal and upheld the judgment of the first instance.(by Feng Fei)
(Editor Shao Jingjing)
(All contents of this newspaper may not be reproduced or used without express permission)