Infringement Case of Well-Known Trademark ROBAM Appliances: Maximum Statutory Damages of RMB 5 Million Awarded
The Well-Known Trademark "ROBAM"
Hangzhou Robam Appliances Co., Ltd. is a leading enterprise in China’s kitchen appliance sector, legally holding exclusive rights to registered trademarks including "老板" and "ROBAM 老板". After decades of continuous operation and promotion, the "老板" mark has repeatedly been recognized as Zhejiang Famous Trademark and certified as a well-known trademark. ROBAM range hoods and gas stoves have won honors such as China Top Brand Product and Top 10 Chinese Kitchen & Bathroom Appliance Brands, enjoying extremely high market recognition and brand influence across gas cookers and range hoods.
The defendants in this case are Shenzhen High-End Kitchen & Bathroom Robam Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd. and its affiliates, which, like the plaintiff, engage in the production and sales of gas stoves and range hoods.
Infringement Facts: Comprehensive Free-Riding on Famous Brands
The defendants carried out systematic, multi-channel and large-scale infringing acts. The words "Shenzhen High-End Kitchen & Bathroom Robam Electrical Appliances", "Official ROBAM Website" and "Official ROBAM WeChat" were printed widely on the outer packages, user manuals, anti-counterfeit cards, equipment bodies and labels of their gas stoves and range hoods. The two Chinese characters "老板" functioned directly as an identifier of product source.
Their sales network covered multiple platforms including WeChat, Douyin, online stores and physical shops, with a wide variety of products, large production volume and extensive sales coverage. They received payments through numerous personal bank, WeChat and Alipay accounts and gained huge illegal profits.
Furthermore, the defendants registered "老板" as part of their corporate trade name. Founded in 2016, the defendant company operated in the same industry after the plaintiff’s trademark registration. It ought to be fully aware of the popularity of the ROBAM brand yet took no measures to avoid confusion. Legally, this constitutes obvious intent to free-ride on the plaintiff’s business reputation. Even if the full corporate name was used in standard format, it inevitably confused the public and amounted to unfair competition.
In May 2021, the company was first listed in the business anomaly list as its registered address could not be reached, a clear sign of chaotic operation at an early stage.
First Instance Trial: Maximum Statutory Damages of RMB 5 Million
On March 22, 2021, Hangzhou Robam Appliances filed a lawsuit with the Intermediate People’s Court of Weifang, Shandong Province, Case No. (2021) Lu 07 Min Chu No.91.
The Weifang Intermediate Court confirmed all infringement facts: the accused products fell within the same category as gas stoves and range hoods covered by the plaintiff’s trademarks. The infringing logo was identical to the trademark "老板" and confusingly similar to "ROBAM 老板", likely to cause public confusion and misidentification, thus violating the plaintiff’s exclusive trademark rights.
Regarding damages, the plaintiff claimed compensation calculated based on the defendants’ illegal profits and submitted preliminary supporting evidence.
The court ordered the defendants to submit financial books, delivery records and other materials to prove the quantity and unit price of infringing products, and clearly notified them of the legal consequences for refusal. However, the defendants failed to hand over any documents within the reasonable period set by the court.
Due to the defendants’ refusal to cooperate, the court relied on the plaintiff’s claims and evidence to calculate the sales volume, unit price and profit margin of infringing goods, concluding the defendants’ total illegal profits reached RMB 45.256 million.
This figure far exceeded the plaintiff’s claimed compensation of RMB 5 million. The court held the plaintiff’s limited claim of RMB 5 million constituted a legitimate disposal of civil rights and fully supported it.
A noteworthy detail of the compensation logic: the plaintiff claimed statutory damages rather than punitive damages.
After review, the court found the defendants demonstrated obvious subjective malice and severe infringement circumstances, satisfying the applicable conditions for punitive damages. Since the plaintiff only requested statutory damages, the court fully incorporated punitive factors such as subjective malice and severe circumstances into the calculation and issued the maximum statutory damages award of RMB 5 million.
On February 14, 2022, the Weifang Intermediate Court issued the first-instance judgment: the defendants must immediately cease production and sales of infringing products, stop using the word "老板" on websites, WeChat and other platforms, change their corporate name to remove the characters "老板", and pay a total of RMB 5 million to cover the plaintiff’s economic losses and reasonable litigation expenses.
Second Instance Affirms the Original Judgment
Dissatisfied with the first-instance ruling, the defendants filed an appeal with the Higher People’s Court of Shandong Province.
After second-instance trial, the Shandong Higher People’s Court confirmed the original judgment had clear facts, correct application of law and reasonable compensation amount.
On February 3, 2023, the Shandong Higher People’s Court rendered the second-instance judgment, dismissing the appeal and upholding the original ruling, which has now taken legal effect.
Typical Significance of the Case
This case sets an important precedent in three aspects:
-
Statutory damages with punitive effect. The Shandong Higher People’s Court clarified that where conditions for punitive damages are met yet the claimant requests statutory damages, punitive factors including subjective malice and severe infringement shall be fully weighed when determining compensation. The maximum RMB 5 million award in this case fully embodies such judicial logic.
-
Full application of the burden-shifting rule for evidence obstruction. When the defendants refused to submit financial records, the court accurately calculated their illegal profits based on the plaintiff’s evidence and industry data, proving far higher gains than the claimed damages. This mechanism effectively solves two major pain points for IP protection: difficulty in evidence collection and low compensation amounts.
-
Corporate trade names cannot escape regulation. The court ordered the defendant to revise its corporate name and remove the word "老板", striking a heavy blow against the common tactic of registering others’ well-known trademarks as corporate names to disguise infringement. It achieves full-chain suppression of malicious infringing acts.
