Furniture patent rights protection faces three major problems

Recently, Fuye Furniture has filed a lawsuit against the court, accusing it of a total of 15 products being produced and sold infringing five patents of Fuye Furniture. Futaba has accused the court of compensation for 54,735,772 yuan, which is a patent for furniture enterprises. The maximum amount of litigation claims. Unicom Home told the Beijing Business Daily that the company’s patent infringement is normal, but their products are not infringing. Currently, the lawyers’ team is cooperating with the court to perform legal procedures together with Futaba. The industry believes that in the patent litigation of furniture, it is difficult to obtain evidence, the difficulty of infringement, and the time and effort of the enterprise, which makes the company's rights protection difficult.

Double Leaf v. Uniform Infringement Patent

On the afternoon of October 10, a large number of media gathered in the conference room of Beijing Zhongwen Law Firm. This is the second time that Fuye Furniture has convened the media to hold a press conference on patent infringement in this conference room. The last time was for the two-leaf lawsuit Lai's furniture infringement appearance patent, this time is aimed at another big brand in the home industry - unified home.

At the press conference, Wang Guohua, an attorney for Shuangye Furniture, who is in charge of the case, said that in 2012, the staff of Fuye Furniture found out in the market that the products that are being sold by Yitong Household and the products of Fuye Furniture. Much like. After the company learned from the company, in May 2013, it entrusted a lawyer to conduct a forensic investigation on the unified household products. It was found that a total of 15 products being sold in the unified home infringed the patent rights of the double-leaf furniture products, and the lawyers were released to the unified system. After the letter was not fulfilled, the Shuangye Company Lawyers filed a lawsuit against the Beijing No. 3 Intermediate People's Court on August 21, 2013, in accordance with the relevant laws, alleging that 15 products of Unification Home violated the five patents of Futaba and required it to stop. Production and sale of infringing products, and claiming economic losses of 54,735,772 yuan. Two days later, the court issued a notice of acceptance to both parties involved. As of the Beijing Commercial Daily reporter's press release, the case is still in trial.

Gao Fei, executive director of Futaba Furniture, said at the press conference that Fuye Furniture is a well-known enterprise specializing in the design and production of solid wood furniture. The design style of its products is unique in the industry. Futaba has always attached great importance to the protection of product design patents. In August this year, Shuangye v. Lai's furniture infringement appearance patent case won the first trial and became the "first case of the patent security rights of solid wood furniture in the home industry." "The victory in the case of Lai's case is undoubtedly the added confidence of Fuye in the road to safeguarding rights. This time, it is not for money, but to create a clean environment for the industry."

Unification Home claims not to infringe

On October 15th, the Beijing Business Daily reporter came to the store of the double-leaf lawyers to collect the infringing products of the unified home located near the Madian Bridge in Beijing. When taking out photos of 15 suspected infringing products provided by Futaba, the salesperson here said that they sell European and American style furniture, and there are no photos on them. When the Beijing Business Daily reporter viewed the two-storey product booth in the store, he did not find furniture similar to the photo.

A salesperson of the store carefully looked at the comparison photos of the products suspected of infringing the appearance of the patent and the double-leaf furniture products provided by Futaba, pointing to one of the sofas and a coffee table, which can be seen only from the photos. These two products are not exactly the same. "The sofas and tea tables of these two brands are similar at first glance, but the distribution of the solid wood edge of the sofa and the coffee table can be seen by the naked eye. This does not involve infringement. problem". Another salesperson also said that the furniture is now almost the same, and if it is carefully studied, it will be infringed.

Zhang Hailin, chairman of Yitong Home, also categorically denied the allegation of infringement. "Unified Home has a lot of its own product patents, and will not infringe on the appearance patents of other companies. At present, the entrusted lawyers of Unification Home are negotiating with Futaba and actively cooperate with the court for relevant review." Zhang Hailin said that the lawsuit actually It is normal. International brands such as Samsung and Apple often sue, not to mention furniture companies with similar product appearances. "We are waiting for the trial results."

Furniture patent rights protection is now three major problems

Futaba furniture recognizes the infringement of the home, and the unified home does not think that it is infringing. The final win or loss of the furniture appearance patent rights case is still difficult to judge. Insiders analyzed that even if they went to court and even made a judgment, I am afraid it would be difficult to implement it well. Claims are difficult to obtain evidence, the infringement is difficult to identify, and the time and effort of enterprises are the three major problems faced by furniture companies in their rights protection.

In the case of patent infringement lawsuits, the first thing that is difficult to determine is the amount of compensation. Usually, in the case of infringement, the amount of the claim reported by the enterprise to the court is the product of the number of suspected infringing products, the number of suspected infringing companies and the sales of the suspected infringing company. Cao Yingchao, the former secretary of the China Furniture Association, said that the amount claimed is only an estimate. “The turnover of the defendant’s business is not completely transparent, and it can even be fraudulent. This will greatly reduce the claim of the plaintiff’s enterprise and the defendant may escape a large amount of illegal costs.”

Second, the difficulty in identifying violations is also a major problem. Although the patent right is determined to be detailed in every component of the furniture product, it is almost impossible for the enterprise that attempts to violate the law to make a slight change to the shape of the component, which makes it difficult for the enterprise to obtain evidence.

In the process of appearance patent rights protection, it is a lot of trouble for many companies to feel uncomfortable. It took a lot of money to win the lawsuit. If you lose, the manpower and financial resources you pay will be equal. Taking Shuangye’s complaint against the unified infringement case as an example, it took a lot of time to do the forensic work in the early stage. Gao Fei said that if the company has not done such a great deal of work, it will be a blow to the company.

Experts in the industry said that although the appearance of patent rights protection in furniture enterprises is facing various difficulties, it can be seen from the victory of the double-leaf sue, the current awareness of corporate rights protection has been greatly improved, and it has also received the attention and support of the society. The double-leaf and the unified court are in court, no matter what the result, the patent rights protection of the furniture industry is a reference.

This is a collection of indentation, finishing, heat finishing, heating flatten the production of cold-pressed flat, cut paper,