Chinese copycat “MUJI” beats the genuine one down, demanding an apology and monetary compensation

(Editor’s Note: The copycat has been using the same layout, design and logo in the physical store “Natural Mill” after the lawsuit in 2018. Muji has released its apology statement after the Final Appeal. Muji can no longer use “無印良品” in its logo as it now officially owned by the copycat).

Famous Japanese brand MUJI was copycatted in Mainland China and even blamed for infringing the trademark of its copycat and lost the lawsuit. The Beijing Municipal High People’s Court made a final verdict recently, ordering Ryohin Keikaku Co., Ltd. (mother company of MUJI) and Shanghai MUJI to stop infringing the exclusive trademark of “Beijing Wuyinliangpin” (無印良品) held by Beijing Cottonfield Textile Corporation.

According to the verdict, MUJI is prohibited from displaying any logo of “Wuyinliangpin” (無印良品) in all textile products afterwards. Moreover, it ordered MUJI to publish a statement at the Tmall MUJI flagship online store and all the MUJI physical shops in China as an apology for its infringement. MUJI also needs to compensate for the financial loss of CNY500K and a “reasonable litigation fee” for CNY126K.

Japanese copyrighted MUJI has to compensate the copycat for CNY626K

The Paper reported, the story of misappropriation of the Japanese MUJI trademark dated back to 28 April 2001 when Hainan Nanhua Trading registered the trademark of “Wuyinliangpin” (無印良品), on certain products including cotton, cushion cover, towel, bath towel, bedsheet, pillow cover, quilt and quilt cover etc. In 2004, the trademark was transferred to Beijing Cottonfield Textile which later invested in “Beijing Wuyinliangpin Company”, a company incorporated in 2011. Beijing Cottonfield Textile and Beijing Wuyinliangpin sued MUJI in 2015 started the litigation of infringement.

MUJI lost in litigation, on the word “MUJI” allowed to be displayed on textile products

The High People’s Court ruled that the respondent’s logo printed on its bath towel, towel and bathing cushion products infringes the plaintiff’s exclusive right of the trademark.

It was all about the copycat had registered the trademark in China earlier than MUJI. The Judiciary had made a verdict last year ruling MUJI’s lost. Ryohin Keikaku and Shanghai MUJI then filed an appeal to the High People’s Court in December last year, and the higher court recently dismissed the appeal and re-affirmed the lower court’s verdict.

Copycat forestalled copyrighted, MUJI got no way out

Ryohin Keikaku said in a statement, Shanghai MUJI are not allowed to use the Chinese trademark on towels, bath towesl, bedsheets and certain textile products in China because another company had registered the trademark. It also stated that it had already rectified the trademark on its products. MUJI was found infringing the trademark in 2014 and 2015.

This is a complicated dispute over the trademark of “Wuyinliangpin” (無印良品) between China and Japan. Apart from products trademark, Beijing Cottonfield Textile had also opened some physical shops in China named “Wuyinliangpin Natural Mill” (無印良品 Natural Mill), which .

It opined that the Hainan Nanhua Trading had designed a plant-dyed towel in 1990s and, by such non-artificial dyeing technique, thereby sought to the corporate value of “excellent quality”. At that time there was a popular Malaysian Mandarin musical ensemble named “Wuyinliangpin” (無印良品) and thus Hainan Nanhua Trading branded that towel in that name. Beijing Cottonfield Textile commented that the establishment of the brand was completely unrelated to the Japanese MUJI.

Nowadays, there are 30 shops in China using the trademark of “Wuyinliangpin” (無印良品) displaying white characters on red, permitted by Beijing Cottonfield Textile and Beijing Wuyinliangpin. Most of them are selling textile products with wood art and colorful painting.

#WithChineseCharacteristics #Piracy #MUJI
https://bit.ly/2tA4aHb

Taobao, Baidu Cloud Storage Service Slammed for Piracy in US’ 2020 Review of Notorious Markets

Several Chinese websites, including Taobao and Baidu Wangpan, are among those named notorious markets for counterfeiting and piracy in an annual review by the US Trade Representative’s (USTR), published on 14 January. Calling out 39 websites and 34 physical markets on their involvement in acts of piracy and infringements detrimental to American intellectual properties, economy and consumers, the report also names a number of brick-and-mortar markets in China, including the Huaqiangbei Electronics Mall in Shenzhen and Xiushui Street in Beijing. It further notes that China remains a major source of physical piracy, having accounted for 92 percent of the total value of pirated imports seized by US Customs in 2019.

In the report, the USTR says that commercial-scale copyright infringement and piracy activities cause US businesses economic losses. The purpose of the report, it says, is to encourage the government and the private sector to take action to reduce piracy and copyright infringement, and a focus this year is how e-commerce platforms are contributing to copyright infringement.

Source: Stand News #Jan15

#US #China #USTradeRepresentative #USTR #NotoriousMarkets #Taobao #Baidu #Piracy #Copyright

https://bit.ly/3iXjkvV

#GreatChinaWall #Piracy
Hong Kong Filmmaker Inserts "Sensitive" Words to Curb Video-Piracy by Chinese Netizens

Source: RTHK #Jul12

Read more
⬇️⬇️⬇️

#GreatChinaWall #Piracy
Hong Kong Filmmaker Inserts "Sensitive" Words to Curb Video-Piracy by Chinese Netizens

Hebe is a Hong Kong filmmaker who fell victim to video piracy: Chinese netizens have been reposting Hebe's original videos to make profit without his consent.

Hebe has a video channel with over 60,000 subscribers. His videos introduces the locations wherein Hong Kong films in the 1980s and the 1990s were shot.

He made complaints to websites in China after discovering that his videos have been 'stolen' and reposted on the Chinese Internet; however, no action has been taken.

In the end, Hebe used an unconventional way to fend off video pirates from China by inserting words that are deemed "sensitive" by Chinese authorities.

Even when his videos were reposted on Chinese websites, the censors would soon take them down.

Source: RTHK #Jul12
https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/ch/component/k2/1600320-20210712.htm

#Creativity #Sensitivity