Bruce Lee ‘s daughter accuses of true kung fu and may not necessarily have legal support

Bruce Lee ‘s daughter accuses of “true kung fu” and may not necessarily have legal support
Li Xiaoning, the daughter of Bruce Lee, serves as the legal representative.Bruce Lee Co., Ltd. sued the internal Chinese restaurant chain Zhen Kung Fu (hereinafter referred to as “True Kung Fu Catering”) to the Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court, arguing that the trademark used by True Kung Fu Catering “looks exactly like Bruce Lee” and demanded compensation of RMB 2.1 ppm, reasonable rights protection expenditure 8.80,000 yuan, and clarified on the surface of the media version for 90 consecutive days that it has nothing to do with Bruce Lee.Logo image of Bruce Lee and Real Kung Fu Catering.This dispute is not the first time for Ms. Li Xiangning to have a dispute with Real Kungfu Catering. As early as 2011, Li Xiangning had sued through the media to sue Zhen Kungfu for substitution, but at the time, both parties had initiated judicial proceedings.In 2018 and early 2019, Kung Fu Food registered a number of trademarks related to “True Kung Fu” and the appearance resembling Bruce Lee’s image. If the above trademarks can successfully pass the objection period, even Ms. Li Xiangning is still the company where she belongs.In the future, it is forbidden to claim the right from Zhen Gongfu on the ground of infringing on the right of portrait.So this lawsuit is imperative, even imminent.The inheritance of celebrity portrait rights has been common in the judiciary.In the 1970s, the Taiwan District Court made a verdict of “Han Yu’s descendants accused of defamation of Han Yu”; in mainland China, in 1996, the descendants of Lu Xun filed a lawsuit concerning the “decision of the deceased’s right” for the first time.After this case, the Supreme People’s Court once promised in writing that the right of portrait belongs to a kind of personality right, not a property right, so it is not within a certain kind of inheritance and cannot be inherited.However, if the portrait of the deceased is used in an insulting manner, causing damage to his reputation, his close relatives may charge.Since then, different district courts have also fixed the above views through judgments. The deceased ‘s right of portrait can be used, but must not be infringed on his reputation, and if it is used for commercial purposes, it must be approved by the deceased ‘s heir.But in the real Kung Fu case, the characters in the “logo graphic trademark”, although it is likely to refer to the classic image of Bruce Lee in the movie “Jing Wu Men” and the statue of Bruce Lee in Hong Kong Avenue of Stars, how big are the two in size”, Should still be determined by the court.We can refer to the “Six Young Children v. Langang Infringement of Portrait Rights”, according to the judgment of the case, the court meeting made a comprehensive judgment around the dimensions of the hairstyle, facial features, upper body characteristics and other dimensions; but in the latest real Kung Fu trademark, publicity, trueKung Fu Restaurant has blurred the image of the trademark very much, turning the trademark into a “male demonstrating Chinese Kung Fu”.And if the character image cannot be recognized as a name, real Kung Fu catering uses the text description of “True Kung Fu”, even allowing us to consider a man who uses Chinese Kung Fu as Bruce Lee, or Bruce Lee’s imitator, will not constitute a correspondingcost.It is foreseeable that the most direct result of this lawsuit is that it may invalidate the registered trademark of Real Kung Fu Restaurant due to the issue of portrait rights.But even so, the event still has the possibility of reversal: from the statement of Real Kung Fu Catering, we see that the legal subject accusing True Kung Fu is Bruce Lee Enterprises, LLC (Li Xiaolong LLC), not Ms. Li Xiangning, it is a pureBusiness disputes.Among them, Ms. Li Xiangning is still the founder of Bruce Lee Company, but in terms of commercial disputes, the logic is exactly the opposite: that is, real Kung Fu catering with the “Bruce Lee Graphic Mark”, the right to request Bruce Lee Company not to use the image of Bruce Leebusiness activities.Therefore, if it is Li Xiangning ‘s dispute over the use of the Bruce Lee portrait, this case may involve a gap in the question of the extent to which the law will bear the liability for compensation without obtaining the heir ‘s consent to use the image of the heir for commercial purposes; but ifThe suspected subject is Bruce Lee Co., Ltd. At present, it seems that there will be no more trouble for the real kung fu.Of course, it is beyond the scope of the discussion here whether True Kung Fu’s graphic trademark will affect its promotion in overseas markets.□ Tian Chen (Legal Worker) Sauna Night Net Editor Wu Longzhen proofreading Li Xiangling