The trademark infringement & unfair competition case regarding the cartoon image trademark Miffy handled by BOB-NORSN was listed as one of the top ten typical IPR cases in 2012 by by Shanghai Municipal Second Intermediate People’s Court. The court finally decided that the respondent had committed the infringement of registered trademark, packaging decoration infringement and malicious registration and use of other enterprise’s name.

The cartoon image Miffy was created by the famous Dutch cartoon author Hendrik Magdalenus Bruna. The image, featured by round face, small mouse, little black eyes, vertical and long ears and the pleasant smile, with a pure, smart, simple and cute style, has been popular. The Miffy series education books, video works have been translated into more than ten languages and are published around the world. Besides, it’s also honored as the national treasure of Netherland.

The synopsis of the case is as follows:

Plaintiff: MercisB.V. (Dutch company)
Respondents: Shenzhen Mifei Sports Ltd (深圳市米菲体育用品有限公司), etc

The plaintiff MercisB.V., a transnational enterprise, has been engaging in the IPR management and business development of Miffy. The company has not only registered the copyright and design patent for relevant images of Miffy but also obtained the registered trademark right on MIFFY and the figure supported by the international registration channel. Besides, the plaintiff has also marked the figure of Miffy on the packages of the children’s shoes. The respondents including Shenzhen Mifei Sports Ltd (深圳市米菲体育用品有限公司) have used MINIFY and other marks on the children’s shoes which they produced and sold. The marks are similar to the packaging decoration of the plaintiff. In addition, the respondents also used the Chinese character 米菲 in its company name.

Shanghai Municipal Second Intermediate People’s Court decided that, the use and propaganda of MINIFY and other marks by the respondents including Shenzhen Mifei Sports Ltd (深圳市米菲体育用品有限公司) has constituted trademark infringement. Its counterfeiting of the famous commodity’s special package and decoration as well as its registration of the Chinese character 米菲 in its company name has constituted unfair competition. Therefore, the respondents were sentenced to cease the torts, compensate RMB 350,000 for the plaintiff, alter the company name within a set period and make apology on newspaper to eliminate the influence.

Source: Shanghai Law Journal (B07 law column, April 26, 2013)
http://newspaper.jfdaily.com/shfzb/files/20130426/308434.PDF

Reference Links;
1.    Company website of Miffy: http://www.miffy.com/
2.    Miffy IPR protection in Shanghai
http://www.chinanews.com/cul/2012/04-20/3835803.shtml
3.    Netherland praises China for the IPR protection
http://www.sipo.gov.cn/mtjj/2013/201307/t20130717_808215.html