无印良品商标权之争迎最新进展 MUJI、北京棉田回应

Core Viewpoint - The long-standing trademark dispute between MUJI and Beijing Cotton Field has seen a recent development, with the Supreme Court ruling to uphold the validity of the "MUJI" trademark in Class 24, which includes textiles and bedding products, thus rejecting MUJI's request for retrial [1][3]. Group 1: Trademark Dispute Overview - The Supreme Court's ruling on June 23, 2024, maintains the legal status of the "MUJI" trademark held by Beijing Cotton Field, which has been a point of contention for 24 years [1][3]. - MUJI stated that the court's decision only affects a limited range of products in China and does not impact its overall operations or brand development in the market [1][5]. - Beijing Cotton Field's chairman expressed that this ruling may lead to a new phase of commercial competition, emphasizing the significant cultural and business interests at stake [1][3]. Group 2: Business Operations and Market Presence - Beijing Cotton Field operates nearly 300 online stores and over 200 physical stores, with a projected scale of 4 billion in the home textile sector by 2024 [1][3]. - The "MUJI" trademark in Class 24 was originally registered by Hainan Nanhua Industrial Trade Company in April 2000 and later transferred to Beijing Cotton Field in 2004 [3][5]. - MUJI has established multiple official online sales channels, including its own website and various e-commerce platforms, to ensure consumers can identify and purchase authentic products [5][6]. Group 3: Consumer Confusion and Brand Differentiation - Consumers have reported confusion due to the presence of multiple stores with similar branding, including "MUJI" and "Natural Mill," which may mislead them regarding product quality and origin [1][2]. - Beijing Cotton Field has taken steps to differentiate its offerings by using additional branding, such as "Natural Mill," to clarify its identity in the market [4][5].