娃哈哈与达能商标权之争案例分析

国际商务合同实践报告学院：管理与经济学院专业：国际经济与贸易报告人：201314513 张婷婷201314525 彭艺茹目录一．案例介绍1.1原文介绍1.2原文翻译1.3案例概述二．案例分析三．结局反思一．案例介绍1.1原文介绍：BackgroundIf you are in China,chances are you drink at least one bottle of Wahaha brand water,or perhaps the company’s iced tea,fruit drinks,or its Future Cola.If you go to the United States,you may even come cross Future Cola in New York or Los Angeles,because the company that first set up shop in an elementary school in Hangzhou,Zhejiang,is going global.The Hangzhou Wahaha Group Co.,Ltd.,China’s leading domestic beverage producer,didn’t achieve success overnight.The company’s predecessor,the Hangzhou Shangcheng District School-Run Enterprise Sales Department,funded its start-up operations in 1987 with a government loan.Zong Qinghou,the company’s founder,and two retired schoolteachers initially sold milk products and popsicles out of a school store,but to benefit the student’s health the group soon began producing and selling nutritional drinks.The company’s success selling nutrition products in school led to its first big expansion:with Hangzhou government support,the company acquired a company then changed its name to the Hangzhou Wahaha Group Co.(The word “Wahaha”is meant to mimic the sound of a baby laughing and is taken from a children’s folk song.)Wahaha’s second large-scale expansion occurred in 1994 when the company merged with three insolvent companies in Fulling,Sichuan,to set up its first factory in Chongqing.The Wahaha Joint Venture (JV)was formed in February,1996.At the start,there were three participants in the JV:Hangzhou Wahaha Food Group(Wahaha Group),led by its chairman Zong Qinghou;Danone Group,a French corporation(Danone);and Bai Fu Qin,a Hong Kong corporation(Baifu).In 1996,the two parties signed a trademark tranfer agreement,with anintention to transfer the”Wahaha”trademark to the joint ventures.The move,however,was not approved by the State Trademark Office.For this reason,the two parties signed in 1999 the trademark licensing contract.According to law,the same subject can not be synchronously transferred and licensed the use to others by the same lost.Therefore,the signing and fulfillment of the trademark licensing contract showed that the two parties had connived the invalidation of the transfer agreement.The”Wahaha”brand should belong to the Wahaha Group,while the joint ventures only have right of use.In October,2005,the two parties inked the No.1 amendment agreement to the trademark licensing contract,in which it confirmed Party A(Hangzhou Wahaha Group Co.,Ltd.)as owner of the trademark.In addition,the second provision of the amendment agreement clearly stated that the several Wahaha subsidiaries listed in the fifth annex of the licensing contract as well as other Wahaha subsidiaries(referred to as”licensed Wahaha enterprises”)established by Party A or its affiliates following the signing of the licensing contract also have right granted by one party to use the trademark.The “licensed Wahaha enterprises”involved in the amendment agreement refer to the non-joint ventures.According to related files,Wahaha owns the ownership of the “Wahaha”trademark,while its non-joint ventures have the right to use the trademark.The Danone-Wahaha Feud--Trademark LicenseFrom May,2007 when Danone initiated legal proceeding against Wahaha,the both sides have carried out several dozen lawsuits worldwide.As of May,2009,Danone not only lost a series of cases against Zong Qinghou and the non-joint ventures in China,but directors of Danone were deemed by many courts to have violated the non-compete obligation of directors,and litigations filed in the U.S.,Italy,France and British Virgin Islands(BVI)were alsodismissed.Now,Wahaha defeats Danone 37:0 in the lawsuits in and out of China.The ownership and use right of the Wahaha trademark is one of the focuses of the”Danone-Wahaha feud.”Danone often insisted that the Wahaha trademark belonged to the joint ventures,so the use of the trademark by non-joint ventures constituted infringement.But Wahaha Group disagreed with that,and emphasized that it was the true holder of the trademark,and the use of the trademark by non-joint ventures was legal.At the beginning of the Danone-Wahaha “marriage,” Wahaha signed a transfer agreement on the ownership of the Wahaha trademark with the joint ventures,and filed a trademark transfer application with the State Trademark Office,which,however,was not approved.”It actually declared the termination of the transfer contract,and the Wahaha trademark is still owned by the Wahaha Group,”said Ye Zhijian,a lawyer who knows the case.Afterward,the two parties signed a trademark licensing contract in 1999 to substitute the original transfer agreement.Both the licensing contract and the consequent No.1 amendment agreement clarify that the non-joint ventures of Wahaha have the right to use the Wahaha trademark.“It was known to and recognized by Danone that the non-joint ventures OEM for the joint ventures,so how could it be possible for the non-joint ventures to use a different trademark from the joint ventures?”Ye noted.To confirm the ownership of the Wahaha trademark,Wahaha referred to the Hangzhou Arbitration Commission for arbitration in accordance with the trademark transfer agreement.In December,2007,the commission made a decision that the trademark transfer agreement between Danone and Wahaha had terminated,and the Wahaha trademark belonged to the Wahaha ter,the Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court affirmed the ruling.1.2 原文翻译：背景如果你在中国,那么你至少喝一瓶娃哈哈品牌水,或者公司的冰茶,果汁饮料,或非常可乐。