Hong Kong name brand takes swipe at copycat
By Cao Li (China Daily)
Updated: 2005-10-12 05:44

SHANGHAI: When Sasa, a Hong Kong cosmetics brand, opened its first Shanghai branch in March it caused quite a stir among the city's fashion conscious.

And it also caused a bit of confusion a shop carrying exactly the same name had been operating in the city for years.

"It opened here ages ago and I buy things from it all the time," said the 29-year-old Miss Zhu.

"Its sign, plastic bags and customer card carry the same characters and letters as those of the shops I saw in Hong Kong."

The long established shop, however, has no connection whatsoever with the famous cosmetics maker, prompting the Hong Kong firm to file a lawsuit for trademark infringement and improper competition.

Shanghai No 2 Intermediate People's Court held the first hearing yesterday.

The Sasa Cosmetic (China) Company Limited is demanding the accused company to immediately cease using its name, publicly apologise and pay compensation of up to 622,000 yuan (US$76,700).

Sasa, founded in Hong Kong in 1978, registered its trademark, both Chinese and English, in Shanghai in 1997 and 1998 respectively, opening up a company branch and then an outlet in the city earlier this year.

"Our firm has a huge presence in the Asia-Pacific region, and the world," said Yang Guosheng, the lawyer of the company.

"The accused company has been using our name and relating itself to us inappropriately. Yang Ruijun, the boss of the accused company, who has been in the industry for years, must know exactly how famous our trademark is, therefore the infringement is intentional."

But the accused Shanghai Shasha Cosmetic Company denied it had attempted to steal the plaintiff's name and reputation.

"Sasa did not found any company or open any shop here in Shanghai before February of this year, therefore it cannot prove its influence before that," said Ding Yisheng, the lawyer for the Shanghai company.

And the Shanghai retailer claimed to be a legitimate company which obtained its name and business licence in 1998.

"The company name we use and the trademark of the plaintiff fall into different systems," said Ding.

Yang later told China Daily that there is still no law prohibiting companies from registering famous trademarks as their name, as long as it is not yet used locally.

The two companies agreed to enter mediation at the end of the hearing. The result of the discussions have yet to be announced.

(China Daily 10/12/2005 page3)