Authentic SUPREME "Official Declaration" To Crack Down On Counterfeits: "Administrative Protection Has Been Sought"

American trendy brand SUPREME finally can't sit still.

Less than a week after our on-site report that Supreme Italia opened its store in Shanghai, Interface Fashion exclusively obtained the official declaration letter of Chapter 4, the intellectual property owner of the SUPREME brand.

The statement said that Chapter 4, as the intellectual property owner of the SUPREME brand, has sought administrative protection from the Chinese authorities for the unfair competition of the two stores opened by IBF (Supreme Italia/Skin) and its affiliated companies in Shanghai, China.

At the same time, the statement also said: "IBF imitated the SUPREME brand, misled the media and law enforcement departments, and even such enterprises as Samsung took it lightly. Most importantly, they hoodwink and cheat consumers. We believe that laws and regulations will, as always, curb such unfair competition. "

In previous interviews, many people said that the brand Supreme Italia, which opened a store in Shanghai this time, has been indistinguishable from the Chaopai SUPREME, which was born in the United States, in terms of color matching, text and other appearance conditions.

Its "own dragon" cooperation with Samsung is undoubtedly another powerful proof. Last December, when many ordinary consumers saw the red logo of SUPREME on Samsung mobile phones, they thought that this brand, which had never officially entered the Chinese market, had found a special way to enter.

At the press conference at that time, Samsung also announced that it had reached a "brand strategic partnership" with SUPREME, and said that this was the first appearance of SUPREME in China. As a result, this wave of cooperation soon ushered in a reversal.

A brand named "Supreme Italia/Skin" also emerged. Unlike SUPREME, an American company founded by James Jebbia in New York and headquartered in Soho District of New York in 1994, Supreme Italia/Skin, which cooperates with Samsung, was registered in San Marino. According to previous reports by the media such as Hyebeast, as SUPREME did not and had no plans to enter the Italian market at that time, its trademark registration qualifications were also compliant at that time and locally.

According to Chinese laws, whether it is easy to cause confusion among the relevant public is a major condition for identifying trademark infringement. Undoubtedly, for "real" SUPREME fans, the existence of "Legal Fake" legal fake Supreme Italia is hurting the brand value of the original brand and eating away some of its potential market space.

Italy Supreme Shanghai Huaihai Road store is about to open, netizen: openly and legally sell "fake goods"

As the legal adviser of SUPREME in China, Dr. Huang Hui, a lawyer of Wanhuida Law Firm and part-time researcher of the Intellectual Property Center of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, also answered the question of interface fashion exclusively this time.

He said: "According to Article 6 of the Anti Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China, the name" Supreme ", which was first used by Supreme in clothing and other commodities and has a certain impact Under the protection of the law, the unauthorized use of the 'Supreme' trade name by the two stores will lead the relevant consumers to believe that the goods or business activities sold by the two stores are related to the companies in Chapter 4, causing confusion among the relevant public and constituting unfair competition. "

According to the relevant provisions of the Anti Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China, Supreme has the right to file a civil lawsuit to the Chinese court for judicial protection against the unfair competition of the stores involved, and also has the right to file a complaint to the market supervision and administration administrative organ for administrative protection. If the administrative rights protection is successful, the operators of the stores involved will bear the administrative legal responsibility of stopping the infringement, confiscating the products involved and being fined.

According to Huang Hui, the inspection team of Shanghai Administration for Industry and Commerce has accepted the administrative protection application of Supreme and conducted on-site inspection of the stores involved. The case is under further investigation. If the administrative organ finally determines that the stores involved constitute unfair competition, it will make an administrative penalty decision of ordering to stop selling, confiscating infringing products and imposing a fine.

According to the statement, Chapter IV Company and SUPREME brand will also continue to carry out global rights protection actions to effectively protect their intellectual property rights and the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.

In recent years, the topic of copycat SUPREME has never stopped. Although this trendy brand, which was born in the United States in 1994, has expanded its channels in a large area around the world, its popularity is very high. Its business value in the mainstream fashion field has also been further confirmed through cooperation with leading brands such as Louis Vuitton and Nike.

This makes it a model worthy of being emulated by fashion brands. In 2011, the Italian company IBF preemptively registered the trademark of Supreme Italia, and applied for the legal identity of Supreme Italia, Supreme Spain, Supreme and other brands through the United Nations agency "World Intellectual Property Organization", which enabled it to expand its business in Spain and other European regions.

In China, this trendy brand from the background of the Italian mafia also showed its ambition. In about December last year, it announced that it was expected to show off in the Mercedes Benz Center in Shanghai in 2019, and it would open a 7-storey flagship store in Beijing and Shanghai respectively. The plan of cooperation with Tmall and JD is also in progress. After the plan was issued, Supreme in New York replied on Instagram that it did not have such plans.

Therefore, the high-profile "Supreme Italia" has also been ridiculed as a "legitimate fake" by many industry insiders and the media.

But Huang Hui said that "legal fake" is actually a false concept. The so-called authorizer of the store involved is IBF (International Brand Firm), which calls itself Supreme Italia. IBF's so-called issue of conducting international registration and designating China based on the trademark application of San Marino according to the Madrid Protocol on International Registration of Trademarks. On the one hand, Supreme has made the basic application of San Marino invalid. According to the central strike principle specified in the Madrid Protocol, once this foundation no longer exists, The corresponding international registration will also be revoked.

On the other hand, according to the international registration, the designation of China is only an ordinary application in law. Supreme has raised an objection against it based on its earlier application and use. The China Trademark Office will make a ruling on the objection in time in accordance with the Chinese Trademark Law or reject the later application for trademark registration in accordance with the principle of protecting the earlier application.

"The act of using the trademark without the permission of the trademark owner is a malicious act. It cannot be tolerated in any country in the world, especially when the trademark has gained certain influence and reputation. This act is unfair competition prohibited by the Paris Convention. In fact, so far, all legal proceedings against IBF initiated by Supreme in Italy have been supported. " Huang Hui said to interface fashion.

He also said: "Because Supreme has been used first in China and has had some influence, at present, IBF's trademark is used later and applied later in China, lacking any legal basis for using the trademark in China, and it is actually illegal. Legal Fake（ Legal counterfeiting is a false concept in itself, which cannot be established at the same time. Since it is Fake, it cannot be Legal. If Legal is Fake, it cannot be Fake. At the same time, using such a contradictory concept is misleading the public. "

Next to the store, under the road sign at No. 839, Huaihai Middle Road, there is a brown sign that reads "Supreme Suppurun", and a line of small words "Italian brand" below it.

In fact, in 2016, SUPREME of the United States sued Supreme Italia to the Milan court. This case was judged as unfair competition by the beginning of 2018. The infringer must remove 120000 goods from the shelves and pay economic compensation to Supreme.

This is why we can't find the official website of Supreme Italia on the network today. Its official website was ordered to be closed, and online information was operated by the official website and social media account of Supreme Spain.

It has to be said that the dispute between Supreme Italia and SUPREME has exposed the lack of awareness and protection of intellectual property in the current trend market. Once the rights and interests of the brand are violated, it needs to spend high time and financial costs to safeguard their own interests, which undoubtedly greatly increases the burden of brand operation. In order to improve the infringement problem in the fashion industry ecosystem, it requires the joint efforts of the brand end and the consumer and other aspects of the market.

After all, not everyone is a die hard fan. Even in the fashion circle, it is a big taboo to know and buy fake products. But ordinary consumers' confused cognition of Chaopai and lack of understanding of the brand's history have exacerbated the difficulty of brand rights protection. Author: Zhou Zhuoran