Abuse of Rights and Legal Consequences

Author: Yingying Zhu, Partner at BEIJING MINGDUN LAW FIRM


Date: June 15, 2022




Intellectual Property Rights (“IPRs”) empower their owners with a privilege to exclude unauthorized parties from use of the relevant subject matter under protection (for example, trademarks, patents, copyrights). However, exercising IPRs might sometimes generate tensions with other sectors of law, such as the civil code, the anti-unfair competition law, the antitrust law, etc. According to the China Supreme People’s Court’s interpretation of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China, where a person exercises any civil right (including IPRs) mainly for the purpose of injuring the national interest, the public interest, or the lawful rights and interests of another person, the people’s court shall determine that there is an abuse of civil rights.[1] In such a situation, IPRs no longer render the owners exclusionary rights against the other users in the market and the owners should also face the legal consequences of their actions.


Recently, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (“Beijing IP Court”) concluded the case of trademark infringement dispute between the appellant Ma and the appellee Shenzhen CHOW TAI FOOK Online Media Co., LTD. (“CHOW TAI FOOK”) and the defendant of first instance Beijing Jingdong E-commerce Co., LTD (“Jingdong”). It was concluded by the Beijing IP Court that the appellant Ma filed a lawsuit of infringement against the legitimate use of CHOW TAI FOOK company based on trademark rights not fairly obtained, which constituted an abuse of rights. Therefore, the appeal was rejected and the original judgment was upheld.[2]


As one of the typical cases where a trademark squatter was left empty-handed on account of an abuse of rights, the above case is sending a clear and strong message to trademark holders that do not use a mark in conjunction with the actual sale of goods or services, but generate or attempt to generate the majority of their earnings by enforcing their trademarks through malicious litigation — “For a truly enforceable trademark, you should earn it fair and square”.


Basic Facts


When the plaintiff Ma filed a lawsuit with the first-instance court, he claimed that he applied for the registration of the trademark 'Jiao Ren (meaning: Proud Person)' on the Class 14 goods related to 'jewelry' on May 6, 2008, and the registration was approved on March 28, 2010. Ma alleged that he had already used the trademark to produce and sell diamonds of the “Jiao Ren” branded series. It was found that CHOW TAI FOOK store was selling at Jingdong’s online platform “Jiao Ren” series of rings and necklaces. Ma thought that CHOW TAI FOOK and Jingdong’s behavior violated its trademark rights, and he requested the court to order CHOW TAI FOOK and Jingdong to cease the infringing acts immediately and to pay him the reasonable expenses and compensation for the economic losses in a total amount of CNY50,000.  

The first-instance court held that CHOW TAI FOOK's use of the “Jiao Ren” logo on the products involved in the case was legitimate and did not infringe Ma's trademark rights of “Jiao Ren” trademark. Therefore, the first-instance court dismissed all the claims of Ma. Ma refused to accept the judgment and appealed to the Beijing IP Court, requesting the revocation of the first-instance court’s decision and the reissuance of a judgment to support all the litigation claims raised.[3]

Beijing IP Court’s Decision

The Beijing IP Court made a judgement in the second instance to uphold the decision of the first-instance court. The judgement in the second instance was based on the following findings[4]:

·         Ma's application for registration of the trademark “Jiao Ren” violates the principle of honesty and credibility; and

·         Ma's infringement lawsuit against CHOW TAI FOOK constitutes an abuse of rights.

Why is an “abuse of rights” found in Ma vs. CHOW TAI FOOK?


To explain why Ma’s conduct was characterized as an “abuse of rights”, the Beijing IP Court highlighted the following key elements[5] of “culpability” on the part of the plaintiff Ma:

1.    Trademarks Comparison

The “Jiao Ren” trademark that Ma applied for registration on a later date is similar to the “Jiao Ren” logo previously used by CHOW TAI FOOK in terms of text combination, design and visual effect.

2.    Subjective Intent

CHOW TAI FOOK launched the “Jiao Ren” series of diamond products in 2006. After extensive use and publicity, the “Jiao Ren” series of diamond products and the “Jiao Ren” logo of CHOW TAI FOOK have gained high popularity. Under such circumstances, Ma applied for the registration of “Jiao Ren” trademark in 2008, which is similar to CHOW TAI FOOK’s “Jiao Ren” logo. Judging from the above conduct, it is difficult to say that Ma came up with such idea in good faith.

3.    Trademark Use

The documented evidence submitted by Ma can only prove that he has licensed the trademark after registering the trademark “Jiao Ren” but cannot prove that “Jiao Ren” has been used in the manner recognized by the Trademark Law on the approved goods.

4.    Other Trademarks applied for Registration by Ma

Ma also applied for the registration of more than 30 trademarks including 'Taylor', 'Jinbury', 'Jinshifu', 'Suihao mattress', 'Taylor Burton', 'Gerio Pili', etc. The aforementioned trademarks are including a large span of classes and belong to different industries, including trademarks similar in appearance, the same or similar in category with well-known trademarks such as 'Kimberly' and 'Suibao Mattress' of other brand owners. Neither could Ma prove that he registered the above trademarks with real intention to use nor could he give a reasonable explanation for his need for trademark registration, so the court considered that he had demonstrated an obvious pattern of trademark hoarding behavior.

Accordingly, Beijing IP Court determined that Ma's application for registration of the trademark “Jiao Ren” violated the principle of honesty and credibility, and his claim of trademark rights in this case was considered not justified.[6]


Based on the above, it was concluded that,  


The plaintiff filed an infringement lawsuit against the defendant for the latter’s proper use of the “Jiao Ren” logo and demanded compensation, which clearly constitutes an abuse of rights.



What are the Legal Consequences of Plaintiff’s “Abuse of Rights”?


Abuse of rights basically is a defense of the defendant for a lawsuit of IPRs infringement. When such defense proves to be justified in a case, the plaintiff would have to bear the legal consequences resulted from the action.


1.    Defendant is spared from Liability to Plaintiff


Taking a normal trademark infringement case as an example, when the plaintiff’s filing of the litigation constitutes an abuse of rights, the defendant is spared from the following liability to the plaintiff:


·         interlocutory and final injunctions;

·         damages, calculated based on the actual losses of the plaintiff, the profits made by the defendant or a simulated royalty;

·         reasonable costs incurred to the plaintiff; and

·         public apologies or declarations for the purpose of offsetting the negative effect of the infringing activities.


2.    Plaintiff is liable to pay Damages to Defendant


According to the recent official reply[7] made by the China Supreme People's Court to Shanghai High People's Court on June 3, 2021, the plaintiff should be liable to pay damages to the defendant if the following conditions are met:


·         plaintiff’s filing the IPRs infringement lawsuit constitutes an abuse of rights and damages the defendant’s lawful rights and interests as prescribed by law;

·         there are attorney's fees, transportation expenses, accommodation expenses or other reasonable expenses incurred to the defendant in the lawsuit; and

·         defendant bears the burden of proof for the above elements.


The defendant may request for damages through filing a counterclaim in the same lawsuit initiated by the plaintiff or may bring a separate suit to recover the aforesaid reasonable expenses from the plaintiff.



Key Takeaways


·         To successfully invoke the defense of “abuse of rights”, the defendant should prove that there is no legitimate interest exists for judicial protection on the part of the plaintiff and that the plaintiff’s right is exercised for a purpose other than its intended legal purpose.

·         The defendant may request the payment of attorney's fees, transportation expenses, accommodation expenses and other reasonable expenses incurred in the lawsuit where the plaintiff is considered an abuser of rights.

·         The defendant may request for damages through filing a counterclaim in the same lawsuit initiated by the plaintiff.

·         Every player of the market must, in the exercise of their intellectual property rights and in the performance of their duties related to such rights, act with justice, give other players their due respect and observe honesty and good faith.

·         If your business is falling prey to a trademark squatter, don’t back off easily as squatters are losing enforceability of their marks, day by day.




Through promoting creations and rewarding creativities, Intellectual Property Rights have so far proved to be beneficial to all walks of life in our society. However, abuse of such rights goes against the purpose of granting them, undermines the very foundation of the intellectual property system, and causes a counterproductive effect to the society. The abusers of such rights must face the legal consequences of their action.


[1] See Article 3, Interpretation by the Supreme People's Court of Several Issues Concerning the Application of Book One General Provisions of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China.

[2] See Liu Yijun & Tian Fen, Case Closure Information: To sue for trademark infringement based on trademark not obtained with good faith, constitutes rights abuse, Public WeChat Account “bjipct” (May 30, 2022).

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] See the Reply of the Supreme People's Court concerning the defendant's claim for compensation for reasonable expenses on the grounds of the plaintiff's abuse of rights in an intellectual property infringement lawsuit, issued on June 3, 2021.

  • 相关资讯 More
  • 点击次数: 13
    2023 - 03 - 24
    作者:金涟伊信息时代的来临带来了更多机会与市场,其中意见领袖、平台主播等自媒体是这一浪潮中最突出的弄潮儿。但不论是在什么领域,对其品牌的培养都是自媒体运营的重点。运营自媒体账户培育品牌有以下注意事项。 一、 品牌名称选取 对于自媒体相关主体,不论在哪个平台建立账号,一个好的昵称是成功的一半。该昵称也会在未来成为意见领袖、up主或主播的重要品牌,成为吸引用户的最突出的标志之一。因此对昵称的选择是非常重要的。昵称的风格可以千变万化,可以简约,可以标识重点,可以抽象或单纯富有趣味,但不论是何风格都需遵守当地法律法规以及平台规定。 以某平台为例,在平台用户服务协议明确约定,用户所设置的账号不得违反国家法律法规及平台的相关规则,用户账号名称、头像和简介等注册信息及其他个人信息中不得出现违法和不良信息,未经他人许可不得用他人名义(包括但不限于冒用他人姓名、名称、字号、头像等或采取其他足以让人引起混淆的方式)开设账号,不得恶意注册平台账号(包括但不限于频繁注册、批量注册账号等行为)。同时,用户在账号注册及使用过程中需遵守相关法律法规,不得实施任何侵害国家利益、损害其他公民合法权益,有害社会道德风尚的行为。平台有权对用户提交的注册信息进行审核,这也是平台的义务。 概括而言,注册账户名称应关注: 1、 符合法律法规及平台的规定以及公序良俗2、具有可识别性——昵称及特色3、不侵犯他人在先权利 二、 重视品牌维护 自媒体运营的领域除了其频道主要内容涉及的方向外,也应当注意广告、娱乐教育服务方面的品牌维护。自媒体账户通常盈利方式包括:1、平台分成或签约;2、广告;3、衍生产品。对以上不同盈利方式应当各有注意要点。 对于通过平台分成或签约形式盈利的自媒体,应当注意签约合同中对知识产权的约定,...
  • 点击次数: 11
    2023 - 03 - 10
    作者:刘艳玲当专利申请人向多个国家/地区提交专利申请时,如果希望专利申请加快审查进程,我们知道专利审查高速路(PPH)是一个可以利用的方式。PPH是专利审查机构直接开展的审查结果共享的业务合作,旨在帮助申请人的他国同族专利申请早日获得授权。当申请人在一国审查局提交的专利申请中有一项或多项权利要求被确定为可授权时,可以以此为基础向他国审查局就同族专利申请提出加快审查请求。除了可以加快审查以外,答复审查意见通知书的次数也可能会减少,并且申请被授予专利权的可能性也能增加。同族专利申请的审查结果除了上述应用以外,还有其他的利用方式。在此根据实践经验进行相应介绍。 美国根据美国专利相关法规,专利申请的申请人及密切相关人员在该美国专利申请的过程中有义务将对该申请的专利性重要的现有技术文件(包括专利文献和非专利文献)提交给美国专利商标局以供审查员在审查时考虑。这个程序也称IDS(Information Disclosure Statement,信息公开声明提交)。申请人如果没履行IDS提交义务会导致授权专利无法执行(unenforceable)。美国专利实施细则37CFR1.97-1.98以及专利审查指南MPEP609中给出了IDS文件的具体内容提交要求和时限要求,读者可进一步检索查看。这其中包括申请人及相关人员需要向美国专利商标局提交外国同族专利申请的审查意见/审查结果中引用的对比文件,而且需要在收到审查意见/审查结果后3个月内提交且该期限不可延长。对于以PCT方式进美国的国家申请,审查员审查时会考虑美国专利商标局IFW系统中的所有美国专利文献;如果美国专利商标局下发的PCT/DO/EO/903表中指出了国际检索报告和相关文件的副本已经在国家阶段文件包中,审查员审查时会考虑这些对比文件。由于存在法律适用的不同情形,处理申请时请就提交细节向代理专利申请的合作专利律师/代理师咨询。印度 根...
  • 点击次数: 9
    2023 - 02 - 24
    作者:常春引言:  最高人民法院近日公开的(2021)最高法知民终1363号案件的判决书给出了关于侵犯技术秘密的侵权获利计算的新方式,即可以将侵权人在特定项目上的全部获利作为侵权获利只要侵权人有明显过错且该侵权行为直接决定商业机会的得失。这一计算方式是对技术秘密侵权案件中侵权获利计算方法的一种细化,也为其他知识产权侵权的计算方法提供了参照和启示。 案情概述:  A公司与Y公司同时参加某项目招投标,Y公司以相对较低价格中标。A公司发现中标的Y公司实际为其前核心员工组建且均与A公司签署有保密协议,保密协议约定对他们知悉的A公司技术秘密保密。A公司起诉Y公司商业秘密侵权。法院在审理认为Y公司核心员工李某的电脑中保存的该项目的标书、中期报告等文件中包含A公司的技术秘密,而且因为Y公司使该等技术秘密的行为使得其以低价中标,进而使得A公司错失了在该项目中的交易机会。因此,法院基于Y公司在该项目中的营业利润判定给与A公司赔偿。 铭盾分析:反不正当竞争法规定了侵犯技术秘密的赔偿述额需要按实际损失、侵权获利、法定赔偿的顺序确定。其中,侵权获利的计算方法可以参照确定侵犯专利权的损害赔偿额的方法进行。而专利侵权的侵权获利的计算方法则包括侵权人因侵权所获得的利益可以根据该侵权产品(服务)在市场上销售的总数乘以每件侵权产品(服务)的合理利润所得之积计算。侵权人因侵权所获得的利益一般按照侵权人的营业利润计算,对于完全以侵权为业的侵权人,可以按照销售利润计算,但其中应当合理扣除因其他权利所产生的利益,即应当考虑专利在利润中的贡献率。按照上述的计算方法,对于并非以侵权为业的侵权人技术秘密侵权行为的获利可以按以下方式计算:侵权获利=侵权产品(服务)量X侵权产品(服务)营业利润X技术秘密对利润的贡献率;其中,营业利润=销售利润-管理费用-财务费用。但在本案中,法院认为招投标项目有其特殊性,...
  • 点击次数: 12
    2023 - 02 - 17
    作者:金涟伊现如今,品牌对于企业发展的重要性已经无可非议,大型企业甚至成立专门的知识产权公司以统一管理、运营、保护其知识产权。而对于中小企业,品牌保护对自身发展有着更重要的意义。能否另辟新径,避开企业规模的劣势,令其品牌直面消费者,使自身获得相应市场地位,成为中小企业树立优质品牌的工作重点。然而,中小企业品牌在面对猖獗的恶意抢注行为时显得更为脆弱,由于自身规模及可调用资源的限制,通常难以与怀有恶意的商标抢注人,甚至同行业竞争者相抗争。本文将简要介绍目前常见的打击恶意商标申请的办法,为中小企业打击恶意商标申请提供思路参考。 一、 何为恶意商标注册申请及法律相关规定 实践中常见的恶意商标注册申请主要可分为两类:以囤积倒卖商标为目的的恶意商标注册申请;侵犯他人在先权利的恶意商标注册申请。 (一)以囤积倒卖商标为目的的恶意商标注册申请 以囤积倒卖商标为目的的恶意商标注册申请,是指申请人在多个类别大量申请商标,明显超出实际生产经营活动所需。商标法第四条规定,“自然人、法人或者其他组织在生产经营活动中,对其商品或者服务需要取得商标专用权的,应当向商标局申请商标注册。不以使用为目的的恶意商标注册申请,应当予以驳回。”该条规定了向国家知识产权局商标局申请注册的商标应当是生产经营活动所需,不以使用为目的的商标注册申请是恶意商标注册申请,国家知识产权局将予以驳回。 国家知识产权局对不以使用为目的、囤积商标的恶意注册申请的打击力度较重,一旦发现此种申请,将对该申请人所申请的全部商标均予以驳回。此种驳回目前公示在国家知识产权局商标局官网的商标注册审查决定文书栏目中。 尽管国家知识产权局会依职权主动对此种恶意注册商标行为采取行动,但在审查中仍可能存在漏网之鱼。由于此种恶意注册申请会侵占大量商标资源,可能导致企业在申请自创商标时遭遇...
× 扫一扫,关注微信公众号
Copyright© 2008 - 2020北京市铭盾律师事务所京ICP备09063742号-1犀牛云提供企业云服务