[ad_1]
Chinese automakers were put on trial by a Beijing court over a copied car borrowing the design of a dominant European brand.
Jiangling Motor Holding (JMH) has been ordered to stop selling, manufacturing and marketing the Landwind X7, which shares the same design elements as the Range Rover Evoque.
The court determined that the Evoque had been copied onto the X7 with five unique features and that "the similarity of the two vehicles had caused a lot of confusion among consumers," according to Land Rover.
Landwind has been ordered to stop manufacturing the X7.
Significantly, the court also determined that Jaguar Land Rover would receive compensation of up to several million dollars.
"We welcome this ruling from the Beijing Court," said Keith Benjamin, JLR's global legal officer, in a statement released by the company. "This decision is a clear sign that the law is being properly implemented to protect consumers and enforce their rights so that they are not confused or misled, while protecting business investment in the design and l & # 39; innovation. "
Produced since 2015, the Landwind X7 is a true copy of the Evoque, a luxury car that has sometimes been sold almost three times more than the real deal in China.
The original: The popularity of the Range Rover Evoque was his style.
Jaguar Land Rover says the lawsuit is a first for the auto sector because it effectively pulls on Chinese brands that notoriously copy others.
Some Chinese automakers have long been accused of copying the established trademark designs, often going as far as imitating fonts and badges to ensure that the design is as close as possible to the image. original.
In the past, Toyota, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Honda, Chevrolet, Rolls-Royce, Mini and even Tesla have been the subject of Chinese rivals that look remarkably like the vehicles they have produced.
Suspecting a copy of one of his small cars years ago, General Motors bought one of the Chinese models and established the doors between the real and the copier.
So not only was the design copied, but clearly the key under the details under the skin – such as the door lock points and hinges – were also identical.
But previous court proceedings against copycat-style Chinese designs have generally failed.
Some suggested that the lack of understanding of the Chinese legal system was partly responsible.
[ad_2]
Source link
