全球法律精英对话 | 德力西集团： 企业打假维权—品牌价值守护与商业生态重塑

我本科与研究生分别就读于中国政法大学和美国芝加哥大学。在2019 年加入德力西之前，先后有外资律所与内资律所的执业经历，曾专注于跨境投资和并购业务。目前担任德力西集团法务中心总经理，兼任深交所上市公司甘化科工（股票代码：000576）的董事，同时我还在上海国际仲裁中心担任仲裁员，在上海贸促国际商事调解中心担任调解员。

二十余年的执业经验里，我主要专注于境内外的投资与并购以及公司治理与法务合规工作，此外也包括本次分享的核心主题，即品牌法务管理与维权工作。

我们的法务团队敢打硬仗、善打胜仗，成员的专业素养和资质十分扎实，多数人曾是执业律师，且均是浙江省司法厅注册的公司律师，因此法务中心更像德力西集团的内部律所，按照职能模块和产业条线划分职责，既能各司其职，又能团队协同，共同负责和参与德力西集团的品牌管理与维权、合同管理、争议案件管理、投资并购、公司治理与合规建设，为集团的各家企业提供全方位的业务赋能和保驾护航。

I got my L.L.B. from China University of Political Science and Law, and L.L.M. from the University of Chicago. Before joining DELIXI in 2019, I had worked with domestic and international law firms, with my focus on cross-border investment and M&A. Currently, I serve as the General Counsel of DELIXI Group, and concurrently as the Board member of Guangdong Gan Hua Technology & Industry, a company listed on Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Meanwhile, I am on the SHIAC panel of arbitrators and on the SHICMC panel of mediators.

My practice over 20 years has been focused on domestic and overseas investment, M&A, corporate governance and legal compliance. Furthermore, I’m dedicated to today’s topic i.e. brand and IP protection.

Our Legal team is terrific. The members have rich experience and solid professional qualifications. Most of us were attorney at law firms and now we are corporate lawyer registered with Zhejiang Provincial Department of Justice. I would say our Legal team is In-housel “law firm” for DELIXI Group. The members perform their respective functions while collaborate as one team. Together, we make contribution to brand and IP protection, contract management, dispute resolution, investment and M&A, corporate governance and compliance of DELIXI Group.

在德力西的发展历程中，品牌无疑是核心资产之一。作为一家蝉联 23 年 的“中国五百强企业”，“德力西”这三个字的价值早已超越了单纯的标识意义。集团董事局主席胡成中先生曾说过：“让我现在再去创办一家‘德力东’，我也干不成，离开了‘德力西’就不行。”这句话深刻道出了品牌对于企业的不可替代性，也让我们清晰认识到，保护并持续推动品牌增值，早已成为德力西坚定不移的企业战略。

为了守护这份核心资产，我们组建了专业的品牌管理和维护团队，更构建起一整套品牌管理制度和流程。这套制度像一张精密的网络，明确了管理过程中的关键环节：从清晰的目标设定，到具体的管理对象，再到部门职责的划分、行之有效的管理手段，以及管理标准和规范流程，都有细致且严谨的规定，并根据业务的拓展和变化而不断迭代。

说到管理目标，核心就是为集团业务赋能。目前集团的核心业务涵盖了中低压输配电、工控自动化电气和家居电气三大板块，同时在五金和电动工具领域以及新能源精密制造等领域也在积极拓展，品牌法务管理正是要为这些业务的稳健发展注入强劲动力。

而我们管理的对象，具体来说包括企业字号，以及在国际商标分类中第 6 类、第 7 类、第9 类、第 11 类等类别下的约 300 枚境内外注册商标，这些都是我们需要用心呵护的品牌财富。

在管理手段上，我们形成了一套全方位的体系。首先是商标的注册和续展，这是品牌保护的基础工作，确保我们的品牌权益得到法律的初始认可和持续保障；其次是品牌许可和使用管理，通过规范的授权和使用标准，保证品牌在传播和应用过程中的一致性与规范性，维护品牌的良好形象。

更重要的是品牌保护环节，我们主要从三个方面发力：一是针对商标抢注行为，我们会及时向商标局申请异议、无效和撤销，坚决遏制不正当的抢注行为，捍卫品牌的合法权益；二是针对假冒“德力西”的产品和企业，我们会开展深入的调查、取证工作，并通过行政投诉和刑事举报、控告等方式，配合市监、公安等部门行动进行严厉打击，这也是大家常说的“维权打假”；三是针对商标侵权和仿冒字号的企业，我们会果断拿起法律武器，开展诉讼维权，通过司法途径追究侵权者的责任，让品牌得到最坚实的保护。

通过这一系列专业、系统的品牌法务管理举措，我们致力于让“德力西”这个品牌在市场竞争中始终保持强大的生命力和影响力，为企业的长远发展保驾护航。

During DELIXI’s history, the brand is undoubtedly key asset. As one of the "China Top 500 Enterprises" for 23 consecutive years, DELIXI’s value has gone beyond the simple meaning of a logo.   Our Chairman of the Board once said: "Even if I were to set up another 'DELIDONG' company now, I couldn't make it work. It just wouldn't be the same without 'DELIXI'."   This statement profoundly reveals the irreplaceable value of the brand to our company, and also makes us clearly realize that protecting and continuously promoting brand value has long been DELIXI's corporate strategy.

To safeguard the key asset, we set up professional brand management team, systems and procedures, serving DELIXI Group's businesses.  

Specifically, the objects of our brand management include the trade name, as well as approximately 300 trademarks under categories 6, 7, 9, and 11 of the International Trademark Classification in both domestic and international markets. Those trademarks cover multiple business areas of DELIXI Group and are important identifiers of the brand in the markets.

Trademark registration and renewal are basic work for brand protection. Timely trademark registration ensures the uniqueness and legality of the brand in the market and obtains initial legal recognition. Regular renewal guarantees seamless protection of brand rights, avoiding damages to the brand due to the expiration of the trademark.

Sophisticated brand licensing and usage is carried out by formulating criteria, avoiding damage to the brand due to abuse, and maintaining excellent reputation of the brand in the market.

In response to malicious trademark squatting, we promptly file opposition, invalidation, and revocation applications with the Trademark Office to defend our trademarks and to ensure our brand’s unique and distinct status in the market.

Against counterfeit products, we conduct in-depth investigation and evidence collection, and take severe crackdowns through administrative complaints, criminal reports, and accusations, which is the called "anti-counterfeiting." This not only protects the brand's market share but also safeguards the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.

Thanks to the above mentioned professional mechanisms, DELIXI brand has maintained strong vitality and influence in the market competition, and the brand value has been improved continuously.

案情摘要

品牌维权工作充满了艰辛，也充分体现了“业务赋能，风险防范和争议解决”这三项法务工作的核心价值。在团队多年努力下，我们在该领域取得了丰硕战果，其中更有一起案件入选了“2024年上海法院知识产权司法保护的十大案件”。上世纪八九十年代，浙江省乐清市柳市镇崛起了一批生产低压电器的民营企业，德力西集团有限公司是其中的佼佼者。德力西集团的前身乐清县德力西电子元件厂于1991年6月26日成立，后变更为现企业名称，并于1992年设立了上海德力西电器经营部，于1993年设立关联公司上海德力西电器实业公司。在1991-1994年之间，《人民日报》、《光明日报》、《中国经营报》、《浙江日报》、《浙江经济报》、《温州日报》等媒体对德力西集团进行了广泛宣传报道，同时德力西集团在低压电气等商品上注册了“德力西“商标。

上海德力西开关有限公司（以下简称“上海德力西开关”）于1994年2月3日成立，业务范围与德力西集团几乎相同，公司创始人同是乐清市柳市镇人。该公司生产和销售的低压电气商品上突出使用“上海德力西”、“上海德力西开关“字样，并模仿德力西集团官方网店设计、利用山寨版“五百强”榜单进行宣传等手段争夺市场。多年来，德力西集团多次投诉、起诉上海德力西开关及其关联企业侵犯“德力西”字号权、商标权等权益，迫使后者旗下“德力西装潢”“德力西实业”“德力西联合开关集团”等一系列企业更名或注销，但作为核心企业的上海德力西开关一直存续经营。2022年，德力西集团为此上诉至上海知识产权法院，请求判令上海德力西开关停止使用“德力西”字号及相关虚假宣传，赔偿德力西集团相关损失3000万元。

裁判结果

2024年9月19日，上海知识产权法院以一份长达67页的终审判决书，为这桩“长跑”维权画上了句号：判决上海德力西开关立即停止使用含“德力西”字样的企业名称；赔偿德力西集团经济损失500万元。法院在终审判决书中认定：“上海德力西开关”以“德力西”为字号，主观上有“搭便车”的故意，客观上易导致相关公众的混淆误认，其行为构成不正当竞争。

Case Brief

Brand protection work is always tough. after many years of efforts, we have made success in many cases, among which one case was even listed in the "Top 10 Cases of Intellectual Property Judicial Protection by Shanghai Courts in 2024".

In the 1980s and 1990s, a group of private companies engaged in the production of low-voltage electrical appliances emerged in Liushi Town, Yueqing City, Zhejiang Province, and DELIXI Group Co., Ltd. was one of the outstanding ones. The predecessor of DELIXI Group, Yueqing DELIXI Electronic Component Factory, was established on June 26, 1991, and later changed to its current trade name. In 1992, it established Shanghai DELIXI Electric Appliance Business Department, and in 1993, it set up an affiliated company - Shanghai DELIXI Electric Appliance Industry Co., Ltd. Between 1991 and 1994, media agencies such as the People's Daily, Guangming Daily, China Business Journal, Zhejiang Daily, Zhejiang Economic Daily, and Wenzhou Daily made extensive reports on DELIXI Group. At the same time, DELIXI Group registered the "DELIXI" trademark for products such as low-voltage electrical appliances.

Shanghai DELIXI Switch Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Shanghai DELIXI Switch") was established on February 3, 1994. Its business scope is almost the same as that of DELIXI Group, and its founder is also from Liushi Town, Yueqing City. This company prominently used the words "Shanghai DELIXI" and "Shanghai DELIXI Switch" on the low-voltage electrical products it produced and sold. It also competed for the market by imitating the design of DELIXI Group's webpages and using counterfeit "Top 500" certificates for promotion. Over the years, DELIXI Group has repeatedly filed complaints and lawsuits against Shanghai DELIXI Switch and its affiliated enterprises, forcing a series of the latter's affiliates, including "DELIXI Decoration", "DELIXI Industry", and "DELIXI United Switch Group", to change their trade names or to be dissolved. However, Shanghai DELIXI Switch, as the core enterprise, still operate. Therefore, DELIXI Group appealed to the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court for this reason in 2022, requesting an order for Shanghai DELIXI Switch to stop using the "DELIXI" trade name and misleading advertising, and to compensate DELIXI Group for losses, amount to 30 million yuan.

Conclusion

On September 19, 2024, the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court concluded this "long-distance" intellectual property protection case with a 67-page final judgment: it ordered Shanghai DELIXI Switch to immediately cease trademark infringement, to cease using its trade name containing the word "DELIXI", and to compensate DELIXI Group for economic losses of 5 million yuan. In the final judgment, the court held that: "Shanghai DELIXI Switch" used "DELIXI" as its trade name, which showed its intent to "free-ride" (leverage the brand influence of others), and caused confusion and misleading among the public. Its act constituted unfair competition.

在主张对方构成不正当竞争的案件中，我们通过六大核心证据形成完整论证链，最终获法院支持，具体如下：

一、字号使用时间：我方早于被告

提供 90 年代资料证明，德力西字号自 1991 年起已使用，而被告企业成立于 1994 年之后，我方字号在先使用事实明确。

二、企业影响力：我方在被告成立前，已具有地域性知名度

我方提交多类证据证明：

1994 年公司的实缴注册资本已达 5000 万元（30 年前该规模极具分量）；

人民日报、光明日报、浙江日报、温州日报等曾大幅报道我方企业；

有国家领导人接见我方企业领导、参观企业的图片及档案佐证。

三、上海业务布局：我方先于对方在沪落地

举证证明，1992 年（被告成立前），我方已在上海注册多家实体并开展业务（后期因重组转让或注销，但前期布局事实可查），反驳对方“注册地不同即合法”的答辩理由。

四、股东关联与主观故意：对方存在恶意

关键证据显示，对方创始股东与我方创始股东是同乡且为同学。柳市镇是国内低压电器核心发源地（德力西等知名品牌均源于此），对方不可能不知情我方字号，主观恶意明显。

五、字号独特性：对方无法合理解释字号来源

“德力西”字号并非常规词，源于我方创始人胡成中先生“德报人类、力创未来、赶超西方”的愿景；而庭审中，对方无法正面回答其字号来源，这对法官自由心证产生重大影响。

六、补充证据：涵盖虚假宣传等不正当竞争行为

除字号相关证据外，我方还提交对方构成虚假宣传的证据，进一步佐证其不正当竞争行为。

综上，上海知识产权法院最终认定对方构成不正当竞争。

In the case where we claimed the defendant had committed unfair competition, we formed a complete chain of argument through six core sets of evidence, which were ultimately supported by the court. Details are as follows:

1) We used trade name DELIXI earlier than the defendant

We showed the evidence as early as the 1990s to prove that the "DELIXI" trade name had been in use since 1991, while the defendant was established after 1994. The fact that our trade name was used first is clear.

2) We had deeply market influence and recognition before the Defendant’s establishment

We showed multiple types of evidence as follows:

By 1994, DELIXI Group’s paid-in registered capital had reached 50 million yuan (a scale of great significance 30 years ago);

Media agencies including People’s Daily, Guangming Daily, Zhejiang Daily, and Wenzhou Daily had released in-depth reports on our business;

We keep the photos and archives show that state leaders visited DELIXI Group in the earlier 1990s.

3) We established entities in Shanghai earlier than the Defendant

Our evidence shows that DELIXI Group had set up multiple entities and businesses earlier than the defendant in Shanghai. This refuted the defendant’s argument that "different registration locations mean legality".

4) The Defendant has malice, as its founding shareholder has connection with DELIXI Group

Our evidence shows that the defendant’s founder are familiar with DELIXI Group and he’s classmate of one of our founding shareholders. Therefore, it was impossible for the defendant to be unaware of our trade mark and their malice was obvious.

5) The origin of trademark DELIXI

DELIXI is unique name, which was originated from the vision of our company founder, Mr. Hu Chengzhong: "Benefit Mankind with Virtue, Create the Future with Strength, and Surpass the West". On the other side, the defendant could not give answer to the origin of its trade name, which had a significant impact on the judge’s decision.

6) Defendant’s false advertising as unfair competition

We also submitted evidence proving that the defendant had conducted false advertising.

Finally, the court concluded that the defendant had committed unfair competition.

在主张侵权赔偿时，我们通过“营业额 × 毛利率”计算对方侵权获利，并结合多组证据支撑诉请，最终法院结合案件情节作出判决，具体如下：

一、侵权获利计算逻辑

营业额获取：申请调查令，通过向市监、税务部门调查取证，获取被告的年度销售额 / 营业额；

毛利率确定：参考同行业上市公司的公开数据，证明行业毛利率超 20%；获利核算：以“营业额 ×20%”得出对方侵权获利。

二、三组核心证据支撑诉请

提交三组数据证明对方侵权获利超 3000 万，据此提出 3000 万赔偿诉请：

对方税务申报信息；

电商平台统计的对方销售数据；

对方工商年检提交的相关数据。

三、法院判决考量因素与结果

法院依据修订后《商标法》和《反不正当竞争法》，最终按法定赔偿上限 500 万支持我方，判决书中重点考量：

德力西品牌知名度；

对方侵权恶意强度（如股东关联显示的主观故意）；

侵权时间跨度（争议从原审到重审达 7-8 年，判决前对方仍持续侵权）；

侵权影响范围。

When claiming infringement damages, we calculated the infringer’s illegal profits using the formula "turnover × gross profit margin", supported our claim with multiple sets of evidence, and the court ultimately rendered a judgment based on the case circumstances. Details are as follows:

1) Calculation logic for infringement profits

Obtaining turnover: We applied to the court for an investigation order to acquire the defendant’s annual sales volume/turnover from market supervision and tax authorities;

Determining gross profit margin: We referenced public data of listed companies in the same industry to prove that the industry’s gross profit margin exceeds 20%;

Profit calculation: the infringer’s illegal profits were derived using the formula ""turnover ×20% ".

2) Three sets of evidence supporting our claim

We submitted three sets of data to prove that the infringer’s illegal profits exceeded 30 million yuan, and accordingly, filed a claim for 30 million yuan in compensation:

the defendant’s tax declaration information;

the defendant’s sales counted from e-commerce platforms; and

relevant data from the defendant’s annual report.

3) Factors considered in the Court’s judgement

In accordance with the revised Trademark Law and Anti-Unfair Competition Law, the court ultimately supported our claim by awarding the statutory maximum compensation of 5 million yuan. The key factors emphasized in the judgment included:

the brand reputation of DELIXI;

the defendant’s infringing malice (e.g., intent arising from shareholder connections);

the duration of the infringement (the dispute lasted 7-8 years starting from the first instance to the trial, and the defendant continued infringing acts until the judgment was issued); and

the impact of the infringement.

一、维权策略与路径选择

20多年的维权可分为“上下半场”

（1）上半场：双方通过行政复议、行政诉讼等行政法范畴开展维权或抗辩；

（2）下半场：我方更聚焦商标保护和不正当竞争，依托知识产权法律路径推进维权。

二、案由策略取舍

我们在北京最初针对“德力西联合开关”提起了“行政诉讼附带民事赔偿案”。一审判决支持了我方行政部分的诉请（变更德力西联合开关字号），但未支持民事赔偿。经内部讨论，我们果断选择不再上诉，原因有三：（1）变更德力西联合开关字号的诉请已获支持，这是我方核心诉求；（2）尽快拿到该生效判决后，我方再另行提起民事赔偿诉讼，将胜券在握；（3）尽快拿到本案生效判决，与同时期针对“上海德力西开关”提起的诉讼将形成协同效应。

事实证明这个策略是正确的，因我方未上诉，很快拿到了二审生效判决，后在温州中院另行提起了民事赔偿诉讼获胜，且有效推动了针对上海德力西开关的维权案件的进展。

三、外聘律师与公司法务的协作至关重要

在上海德力西开关案的重审阶段，我们选聘了具有知识产权丰富代理经验的上海申浩律师事务所陶国南律师；同时，集团法务经理孟祥通律师作为共同代理人，与陶律师一起出庭。孟律师尤其是在历史档案收集和证据主张方面，与陶律师的专业能力实现了优势互补。

总结归纳：“上海德力西开关案”最终获胜的原因可归结为 ”天时、地利、人和”。其中我认为“人和”最为重要，这包括：“德力西人”坚持不懈的维权精神；胡董对于本案的持续关注和高度重视；内外结合的律师团队为本案的胜利奠定扎实基础；人民法院“勇于担当”，为本案画上了圆满句号。

I. Choice of litigation strategies and roadmap

Over 20 years of disputes can be divided into "the first half" and "the second half":

The first half: both parties battled under administrative law, and applied for administrative reconsideration and administrative litigation;

The second half: we focused more on trademark protection and unfair competition, and leveraged civil procedure to protect our intellectual property.

II. Trade-off of multiple claims

In Beijing case, we initially filed an "administrative litigation with incidental civil compensation case" against "DELIXI United Switch". The first-instance judgment supported our claim in the administrative part (changing the trade name of DELIXI United Switch) but rejected the claim for civil compensation. After internal discussions, we decided not to appeal, for three reasons:

1) the court supports our claim for changing the trade name of DELIXI United Switch, which is our top priority;

2) upon final judgment, we would then file a separate lawsuit for civil compensation, which would be a sure win; and

3) a favorable judgment of Beijing case would make positive effect into the lawsuit filed against "Shanghai DELIXI Switch" during the same period.

Facts have proved that this strategy was correct. Since we did not appeal, we quickly obtained the effective second-instance judgment. Later, we filed a separate civil compensation lawsuit in Zhejiang Province and won, which also influenced the progress of the rights protection case against Shanghai DELIXI Switch.

III. The Collaboration between Outside Counsel and In-house Counsel

During the retrial phase of the Shanghai DELIXI Switch case, we retained Mr. Tao from Shanghai SUNHOLD Law Firm. Mr. Tao has rich experience in intellectual property cases. Meanwhile, Mr. Meng, our In-house Counsel, is very familiar with DELIXI’s historical archives and evidence, and served as a co-representative in court together with Tao.

Summary

The reasons for the final victory in the Shanghai DELIXI Switch case can be summarized as "favorable timing, geographical advantage and unity of people". Among these, I believe "unity of people" is vital and it includes: DELIXI people’s unwavering commitment to the brand protection, as DELIXI’s founder, Mr. Hu‘s highly focus on the case, the team-work among in-house and outside counsel, and the "courage to take responsibility" of the People’s Courts, which brought this case to a successful conclusion.