Certified ‘Well-Known’ Classic Check Pattern Infringed—Burberry Awarded RMB 400,000!
An apparently ordinary checked scarf has turned into a well-known-mark showdown and a RMB 400,000 damages award. When the quintessential British check appears on Chinese e-commerce sites, is it mere “decoration” or outright infringement?
The soul of British style is arguably Burberry’s distinctive camel, black, white and red check—a luxury icon that literally travels the world.
-
In the 1970s Burberry first registered the pattern as a trade mark in the United Kingdom.
-
In 2000 the same pattern was formally registered in China.
-
In 2014 it was officially declared a “well-known mark” (驰名商标), turning the check into a gilt-edged badge for scarves and apparel.
In 2019 Burberry discovered that several Chinese e-commerce platforms were hawking “Classic British Check Scarves” and “Euro-American Style” scarves whose all-over checks were pixel-perfect copies of its colour-combination mark.
Burberry sued the operator of the shops, a company called Ling Mou, demanding an immediate halt and RMB 1.5 million in damages.
Putuo District People’s Court heard the case. The defendant argued:
-
Its scarves carry its own word mark, so consumers distinguish origin by the word mark, not the pattern.
-
The check pattern is purely decorative; it is neither identical nor similar to the plaintiff’s mark, hence no confusion.
-
The scarves were sourced from a third party, entitling the defendant to the “lawful-source” defence.
The court rejected all three defences:
-
Applying the pattern to goods, packaging and marketing constitutes trademark use.
-
Although the lines differ slightly in width, the overall visual impression is identical. Given the mark’s well-known status and fame, consumers are likely to assume the scarves originate from, or are affiliated with, Burberry.
-
The defendant failed to prove lawful source; the hang-tags bore only the defendant’s own name, address and phone number, indicating it was the manufacturer.
Judgment: cease manufacture and sale, destroy remaining stock, and pay Burberry RMB 400,000 in damages and reasonable costs.
Ling Mou appealed; the second-instance court upheld the ruling.
