The Ermenegildo Zegna Group has secured a trademark victory in China.
The Guangzhou Intermediate People’s Court has determined that the Guangzhou Fuyin Co. should cease infringing the trademarks of the Italian men’s wear powerhouse and should pay damages of two million yuan, or about $309,000 at current exchange. This was delivered through the issuance of 21 verdicts.
The court has thus “supported the protection of Zegna’s legitimate rights and interests, reenforced appropriate market order, and confirmed once again Zegna’s longstanding confidence in China’s legal environment,” said the Italian firm.
Guangzhou Fuyin Co. was using labels that were similar to Zegna’s trademarks, such as the Zsnoi collection, ZZsnoi and Zsnoisport. The Zsnoi men’s wear brand was established by Guangzhou Fuyin Trading Co. Ltd.
A pioneer in China, Ermenegildo Zegna opened its first boutique in Beijing in 1991 and has been developing its brands, Ermenegildo Zegna, Z Zegna and Agnona, throughout the region with its network of banners.
The first “Zegna” trademark was granted registration in China in 1973. Since then, the company has worked to build “a comprehensive intellectual property rights protection system, thereby ensuring Zegna’s legal rights and interests are well protected under Chinese law.”
This is the latest signal that Western brands can successfully argue their cases in China. In November, Moncler won a landmark battle against Beijing Nuoyakate Gourmet Co. Ltd. After discovering in 2013 that the Chinese company was manufacturing and selling jackets with counterfeit Moncler logos and that it also tried to register several fake trademarks in China and other markets, the Italian luxury firm sued the Chinese company in December 2014 in the newly established Intellectual Property Court of Beijing. Moncler was granted the payment of around $452,000 in damages in the case.
In 2014, Dsquared2 secured the rights to distribute its collections in China — a cornerstone for the Italian firm that helped overturn its prospects in the area and fully develop its business there. A court in Hangzhou ruled it was “legitimately allowed” to do so — despite the fact that another company has trademarked the Dsquared label (without the 2 figure) and was selling counterfeit products under that moniker.