Global Trademarks
Nike loses “Stickman” circumstance but decides to appeal…..
Nike, one of the most well-known producer of sportswear, has lost it combat versus a lone chinese language program cartoonistZhu Zhiqiang greater than ownership of the well-known stickman cartoon figure which prominently competencies in Nikeadvertisements.
The Beijing court bestowed ownership of “stickman” to Zhu and has ordered Nike and its subsidiarySuzhou to apologize to Zhu and compensate with 300,000 Yuan near to $36,000.
In July 2004 Zhu filed a match up versus Nike saying how the figure experienced been used by Nike in itsadvertisements without any his consent. Zhu persists to be producing his well-known flash films featuringstickman thinking about that 1989 and he was famously recognized on internet as Xiao Xiao.
But Nike in its stand stated that stickman figure in its advertisement was independently producedby Wieden & Kennedy on the employing contract using the institution and NIKE ID owns the copyright. Nike alsoargued that Zhu stickman figure was hardly reliable and was completely special within of the Nike’sstickman.
Zhu Zhiqiang seemed for getting pretty content using the verdict and mentioned “even although it ruled that Nikeonly pays me 300,000 Yuan in compensation instead in the two million Yuan I demanded, I obtained what Iwanted most - confirmation of copyright greater compared to character.”
Nike in its company’s declaration has expressed regret on this choice has made a decision to appealagainst the judgment toward Beijing increased People's Court. Nike mentioned it “always respects theintellectual real-estate advantage rights of others” and would safeguard its individual lawful rights and interests.
This circumstance is just one more demonstration of increasing problems the US giant is facing in China. Its TVcommercial broadcasted in China was recently banned in the think management for Radio, Filmand television set (SARFT). The ministry-level SARFT mentioned the 90-second advert, entitled "Chamber ofFear", "triggered awesome anger among the chinese language program television set viewers," and was "blasphemous".
The advert, which featured US basketball star LeBron James dunking the ball greater than a defeated KungFu master, "violated China's temporary marketing regulations" which need all advertisementsto "uphold countrywide dignity and respect chinese language program culture," it said.
Nike loses “Stickman” circumstance but decides to appeal…..
Nike, one of the most well-known producer of sportswear, has lost it combat versus a lone chinese language program cartoonistZhu Zhiqiang greater than ownership of the well-known stickman cartoon figure which prominently competencies in Nikeadvertisements.
The Beijing court bestowed ownership of “stickman” to Zhu and has ordered Nike and its subsidiarySuzhou to apologize to Zhu and compensate with 300,000 Yuan near to $36,000.
In July 2004 Zhu filed a match up versus Nike saying how the figure experienced been used by Nike in itsadvertisements without any his consent. Zhu persists to be producing his well-known flash films featuringstickman thinking about that 1989 and he was famously recognized on internet as Xiao Xiao.
But Nike in its stand stated that stickman figure in its advertisement was independently producedby Wieden & Kennedy on the employing contract using the institution and NIKE ID owns the copyright. Nike alsoargued that Zhu stickman figure was hardly reliable and was completely special within of the Nike’sstickman.
Zhu Zhiqiang seemed for getting pretty content using the verdict and mentioned “even although it ruled that Nikeonly pays me 300,000 Yuan in compensation instead in the two million Yuan I demanded, I obtained what Iwanted most - confirmation of copyright greater compared to character.”
Nike in its company’s declaration has expressed regret on this choice has made a decision to appealagainst the judgment toward Beijing increased People's Court. Nike mentioned it “always respects theintellectual real-estate advantage rights of others” and would safeguard its individual lawful rights and interests.
This circumstance is just one more demonstration of increasing problems the US giant is facing in China. Its TVcommercial broadcasted in China was recently banned in the think management for Radio, Filmand television set (SARFT). The ministry-level SARFT mentioned the 90-second advert, entitled "Chamber ofFear", "triggered awesome anger among the chinese language program television set viewers," and was "blasphemous".
The advert, which featured US basketball star LeBron James dunking the ball greater than a defeated KungFu master, "violated China's temporary marketing regulations" which need all advertisementsto "uphold countrywide dignity and respect chinese language program culture," it said.
没有评论:
发表评论