The "OMRON Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition Rights Protection Case" represented by Sanyou, has been successfully selected into the "2024 Golden Shield Cases of Intellectual Property Protection for Chinese and Foreign Enterprises" list, jointly organized by Xinhua News Agency and the Capital Intellectual Property Service Services Association.

OMRON vs. a Zhejiang Elevator Company for Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition

Sanyou Client: OMRON Corporation

Sanyou Attorneys: Chen Jian and Mi Tai

Adjudicating Authorities: Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court, Zhejiang Province, High People's Court of Zhejiang Province

Result: The court of the second instance upheld the first instance judgment, sentencing a compensation of RMB 2 million for economic losses and reasonable expenses.

OMRON Corporation (hereinafter referred to as OMRON), a globally renowned automation and electronic components enterprise, has registered and used the "OMRON" trademark in China since 1981, and widely promoted its Chinese translation "欧姆龙" as its corporate image. In 2023, OMRON discovered that an elevator company in Zhejiang was promoting its elevator products through a domain name and directly using "欧姆龙" as its corporate name.

In response to this, OMRON entrusted Sanyou to act as its agent in this case. Sanyou formed a legal team to file lawsuits through two legal channels: trademark infringement and unfair competition. The actions focus on the following key points.

1) Establishment of Domain Name Infringement

The court ruled that although the website in question did not directly sell products, its display of products and contact information constituted a confusing commercial promotion and created trading opportunities, falling within the scope of e-commerce.

2) Chinese translated names are protected

For trademarks, the scope of protection is not limited to the logo itself, and their corresponding translations are also protected by law under certain conditions. This case is based on the long-term concurrent use of the plaintiff's Chinese and English logos and public awareness. "OMRON" has formed a stable correspondence with its Chinese translation "欧姆龙". The defendant's use of this Chinese translation as the company name constitutes unfair competition.

3) Breakthrough in product scope

By providing evidence that the elevator control system and other components are closely related to automation equipment, there is a commodity correlation, and infringement is established.

4) Timely property preservation

Considering that the compensation ruled by the effective judgment may be relatively high and there may be difficulties in enforcement after the plaintiff wins the case, property preservation was applied to the court at the time of filing the lawsuit, fully ensuring the smooth execution of the court's judgment on compensation.

In the end, the court upheld the plaintiff's claim and ruled that the defendant's actions constituted trademark infringement and unfair competition. The court ordered the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses and reasonable expenses incurred to stop the infringement, totaling RMB 2 million.

This case not only demonstrates the firm stance of Chinese judicial authorities in equally protecting the legitimate rights and interests of foreign-funded enterprises, but also clarifies that Chinese translations of overseas enterprises are also protected by law under specific conditions. It also provides a practical example for regulating market competition order and strengthening intellectual property protection.