jordan shoes UGG Boots

UGG的商标争议案件
在一些国家，UGG是一个广受争议的商标，在澳大利亚，单词“ugg”已经从注册商标局中移除，任何雪地靴 都可以标注自己是“ugg”。在澳大利亚和新西兰之外，UGG（大写字母）是一个由 Decker 户外公司注册的商标。
　1971年,jordan shoes “在为步行者效力了18年，澳大利亚冲浪运动员Shane Steadman，开始卖ugg雪地靴,jordan shoes，并注册UGH为自己的商标。在1979年，另外一位冲浪运动员Brian Smith，买了一些澳大利亚制的ugg靴子带到美国，开始在纽约出售，主要为在加利福尼亚的冲浪者用。他 建立了ugg holding公司，从澳大利亚获得了Steadman商标，并且在1985年注册了自己的美国商标，商标 形状为一只公羊头上写着一行字：“Original UGG Boot UGG Australia”,jordan shoes。1995年,jordan shoes www1.airbrandshoes.net，他把股份卖给了现在的Decker公司,jordan shoes www.airbrandshoes.com中文，1996年，Decker在美国正式注册了“UGG”商标,jordan shoes。
tag:
UGG Boots
Cheap Ugg
UGG Boots UK
Ugg Sale
Boot Sale
Short Ugg

[g3juh3zy3wh]

Online
Urumqi (Reporter Rao Junhua correspondent Pan Weina) picking coal off the driver Mr. Lee, the car sliding and falling caused his death. Subsequently, Mr. Lee sued the insurance company will court families seeking compensation for car insurance third party liability insurance, but insurance companies that Mr. Lee is not in third party liability insurance clause
2 15,air max 2010, Tianshan District Court Judge introduced, the court found, when the accident occurred, Mr. Lee is third party liability insurance policy in the Lee family of third party liability insurance and the amount of 122,000 yuan. This reporter learned that, at present, the sentence has been effective.
early last year, Lee driving his SUV on the road, passing through the vicinity of East Baiyang Gou found the road a few pieces of coal, when vehicles are passing through coal. He then stop, want to pick coal open, not a slip back to the vehicle suddenly, he was hit and died instantly.
later, Mr. Lee took the family before the incident in a third-party liability insurance companies to find insurance companies mandatory insurance, required by the policy Peifu 12.2 million claim payment. The insurance company claimed that, Mr. Lee is not insured vehicle accident insurance coverage contract,air max 24 7, the refusal of compensation.
desperation, Lee family, the insurance company taken to court for the payment of claims payment.
the court, the insurance company that,air max shoes, according to the provisions of compulsory insurance to pay the insurance company assumes Peifu obligation on the premise that traffic accidents, and the case is not a traffic accident; under the terms of third party liability insurance in the insurance period, Mr. Lee in the use of the insured vehicle during the accident, leading to a third party personal injury or property suffered direct losses, insurance companies, according to the insurance contract should be given compensation.
insurance company that the third party is an accident in the vehicle suffered personal injury or property damage, but does not include persons in the vehicle and the insured vehicle, the car belonging to Mr. Lee on the staff, not the third party.
court found that although the incidents are not accidents, but in the accident, Mr. Lee can be recognized as a
case the trial judge said this case, the judge Mr. Lee is a particular time,air max 90, whether living on the basis of the insured vehicle, the car is the Meanwhile, the motor vehicle is a vehicle,nike air max 2010, no one can permanently on top of exposure to motor vehicles, so the motor vehicle involved in the insurance contract the same identity, the two can be as specific changes in time and space conversion; Second, Mr. Lee was not killed in the process of driving the vehicle, in the event of an accident, he was under the car, officers should be under the car, therefore, the insurance company should be paid to the owners of third party liability insurance of insurance claims payments.