The three words "Songhua River" are printed on the rice packaging. Many rice merchants in Chengdu...

Two generations have been in the rice business for more than 30 years

Lao Gu, who speaks an authentic Northeastern dialect, likes to chat with customers who come to his door

What Laogu didn't expect was that the "Songhua River" brought him benefits and lawsuits

The same as Laogu were convicted of infringement, as well as more than 20 other rice merchants in the logistics park and the manufacturers behind them

"Why can't the rice from the Songhua River Basin be called the Songhua River?" Laogu believes that this series of cases is exactly the same as the "Qinghuajiao case" that has attracted widespread attention recently

ask for help

"Songhua River" is printed on rice packaging

Sued for infringement after 13 years

The Chenglin Rice Operation Department of Laogu is located in the Grain and Oil Trading Zone of Haibawang Chengdu Food Logistics Park, Anjing Town, Pidu District

"I have been selling rice for 30 years, and the three words 'Songhua River' have been printed on the packaging for 13 years, and there have been no problems before

In addition to the three big red characters "Songhua River" prominently printed in the middle of the package, the rice sold by Laogu also has the words "Cheng Lin", "Birch River" and "Pearl Rice"

The verdict records the evidence-gathering process of the plaintiff before the indictment

confrontation

The plaintiff holds 3 "Songhua River" trademarks

Whether it is infringing or not

After the Pidu District Court accepted the case, it applied the summary procedure and held a public hearing

The evidence submitted by Chia Tai Sangtian Company shows that the company is the holder of the registered trademark of "Songhua River" and has 3 registered trademarks of "Songhua River", numbered No.

Chenglin Rice Co.

judgment

The defendant infringed the exclusive right of registered trademark

Order to stop infringement and pay compensation

On January 27 this year, the Chengdu Pidu District Court made a first-instance judgment on the case

The court held that the three registered trademarks of "Songhua River" held by the plaintiff Zhengda Sangtian Company were still within their validity period.

The court also held that the Songhua River is only a river name, not a specific place name.

To this end, the first-instance judgment of the Pidu District Court is as follows: Hulin Chenglin Rice Industry Company immediately stopped production and sales, and the Pidu District Chenglin Rice Industry Management Department immediately stopped sales of infringing the exclusive rights of the registered trademarks involved in the three cases of Zhengda Sangtian Company.

Controversial focus

Plaintiff's statement:

The verdict shows that the rights protection is legal

In the past two years, there have been 44 rights protection cases

According to the company's data, the plaintiff in this case, Zhengda Sangtian Company, was established on November 20, 2014, with a registered capital of 25 million yuan and its domicile in Chaoyang District, Changchun City, Jilin Province
.
The company has 19 affiliated companies, and the actual holding company is Chia Tai (Cixi) Investment Co.
, Ltd.
(45% of the final beneficiary shares)
.

"It's not a question of whether the fonts are similar or not.
The use of the three words 'Songhuajiang' is already infringing
.
" The Huaxi Metropolis Daily and the cover news reporter called Zhang Zhengquan, the legal representative and general manager of Chia Tai Sangtian Company, and he responded: "Since the court has ruled in our favor, it means that this rights protection is legal
.
If these businesses appeal, we will also actively respond, and everything will be in accordance with the court's procedures
.
"

Zhang Zhengquan said that it took them more than a year to prepare the evidence pictures on the notarial certificate
.
As the plaintiff, Chia Tai Sangtian Company acquired 3 registered trademarks of "Songhua River" involved in this case from another company in Jilin on June 6, 2016.
The 3 trademarks were approved and registered in 1998 and 2016 respectively
.
Upon renewal, the validity period of the 3 trademarks has been extended to between 2026 and 2028
.

According to the company's data, since 2020, Zhengda Sangtian has involved a total of 44 judicial cases in two years, most of which are disputes over trademark infringement
.
The defendant enterprises were mainly from Sichuan, Jiangsu, Heilongjiang, and Jilin, and 28 of them were tried by the Pidu District Court of Chengdu
.

Defendant's attorney:

Plaintiffs seek to transfer public resources

become its own monopoly resource

In Haibawang Chengdu Food Logistics Park alone, there are more than 20 rice distributors involved in this infringement lawsuit
.

"The result of the first-instance judgment is too disappointing
.
" Lao Gu said that on February 22, he and more than 10 other rice manufacturers had appealed to the court.
"At present, more than 10 of us have formed the first batch of appellants and hired The same lawyer
.
In the next few days, manufacturers and merchants will continue to file appeals
.
”

"This case is of the same nature as the 'Qinghuajiao case' that attracted widespread attention from the society some time ago
.
" Wang Rengen, a lawyer representing Laogu et al.
and a lawyer from Sichuan Mingju Law Firm, believes that even if "Songhua River" is registered as a trademark, Songhua Jiang is a well-known river name, geographical name and common name.
It is the "mother river" of the Northeast people and a public resource of the whole society
.
Wang Rengen said that Lao Gu and others printed the words "Songhua River" on the packaging, not to attach the trademark "Songhua River", but to describe that the rice produced and sold by the appellant came from the Songhua River Basin, because The intersection of Songhua River, Heilongjiang and Ussuri River plains is the core production area of ​​rice in Northeast China
.

Wang Rengen believes that "the plaintiff's attempt to turn the public resource of the 'Songhua River' into its own monopoly resource is obviously unfair to other businesses, and it is also detrimental to the market environment
.
The use of the three characters is not the use of trademark rights, but descriptive and reasonable use and use in good faith, and there is no problem of infringing on the trademark rights of the appellee
.
”