(By You Yunting)The 2014 FIFA World Cup is taking place at several venues across Brazil, and is attracting attentions from all over the world. According to reports, CCTV holds the exclusive rights of broadcasting 2014 FIFA World Cup in mainland China. However, CCTV refuses to sell the right of live network broadcasting but only sells the on-demand right of network broadcasting to video sharing websites. In reality, CCTV refusing to sell the right of live network broadcasting could potentially be considered to be a violation of the Anti-Monopoly Law. The following is our legal analysis.
Why UniStrong’s Navigation Found Guility of Copyright Infringement against Microsoft？
(By Luo Yanjie)Our previous post How does Microsoft Settle Its Problems of Software Copyright Infringement in China introduced the difficulties of protecting its rights and interests in China. However, in today’s post, the court decided the trade practices constituted copyright infringement and ruled in favor of Microsoft, thus boosting confidence for all software owners.
Introduction to the Case:
Appellant (defendant at first instance): Beijing UniStrong Science & Technology Co., Ltd (“UniStrong”)
Is It Illegal for the SARFT to Prohibit Installing Youku and Iqiyi in Internet Cable Box?
Is It Illegal for the SARFT to Prohibit Installing Youku and Iqiyi in Internet Cable Box?
–Analysis on the Prohibition of Installing Youku App and Iqiyi App on the Internet Cable Box
(By You Yunting) According to some media reports, the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television (the ”SARFT”) issued a rule to local administrations requesting to delete Youku App, Iqiyi App, Sohu App and browsers from Wasu Box and Internet cable Set-top boxes (the “boxes”), which enables users to support TV, games, online video, music and photos. At first glance, i was astonished how it could be called boxes if without Youku App, Iqiyi App and browsers. However, Hangzhou Wasu Digital TV Media Group confirmed receiving the rule shortly after the reports came out. That being the condition, we would like to analyze the rule.
Supreme Court Determined Trademark Non-infringement for Using Prior Enterprise Name with Good Faith
(By Luo Yanjie) Both the enterprise name and the trademark distinguish the sources of goods or services, so that in practice they may conflict with each other. However, trademark, an exclusive right, has functions so as to prohibit others from using it as enterprise name. Under some circumstances, the enterprise name can coexist with the trademark. In today’s post, we would like to introduce such a case.
Introduction to the Case:
Retrial Applicant (Plaintiff at first instance, appellant at second instance): Yinchuan Buma Trading Co., Ltd (the “Yinchuan Buma Trading”)
Traditional Media shall Enhance Themselves against Internet Infringement
(By You Yunting) According to news media’s reports, the National Copyright Administration of China (the “NACA”), State Internet Information Office (the “SIIO”), Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (the “MIIT”) and the Ministry of Public Security (the “MPC”) recently initiated the 10th special campaign dubbed “Sword Net Action” against online piracy and infringement, centered on cracking down on some websites’ unauthorized reprint from traditional media. This “Sword Net Action” could be better for traditional media, but governmental action gradually has different stages. Traditional media must improve practicing skills in the legal campaign against new Internet media.
Beijing Intermediate Court Published Its First Preservation Injunction Against Baidu
(By You Yunting) The Chinese internet industry is a fiercely competitive one in which many large internet companies have used lawsuits to gain a competitive advantage. Lawyers are engaged by internet companies to fight against their competitors using any new laws and regulations that might offer opportunity. In the most recent unfair competition litigation Qihoo 360 v. Baidu, Qihoo 360 applied for a litigation injunction to prevent Baidu engaging in infringement. On May 23, 2014, the Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court issued its first litigation injunction since the new Civil Procedure Law came into effect.
Could Toutiao.com Achieve a Settlement with Traditional Media?
(By You Yunting) Toutiao and its investors would never have thought that a bomb from traditional media would come close on the heels of the Toutiao announcement that it had secured $100 million USD of Series C financing at a valuation of $500 million USD. The Beijing News made a comment “Toutiao.com: Whose headlines are they?” to attack the copyright infringement of Toutiao.com. Afterwards, Toutiao instantly replied, categorically denying infringement. However, just as the trees may wish to be still, the wind doesn’t stop, Toutiao may prefer the criticism to stop, but the traditional media will not subside. Soon, the copyright infringement of Toutiao soon became a public focus, being the subject of a variety of media’s collective enforcement on the grounds of copyright infringement.
Is It Legitimate for Toutiao.com to Transcode News Websites for Mobile Users?
(By You Yunting) According to news, Toutiao, a personalized news app, announced that Toutiao has secured 100 million dollar of Series C financing at a valuation of 500 million dollar. Afterwards, the Beijing News, a traditional paper news, soon posted a comment that Toutiao’s contents are suspected of copyright infringement. However, Toutiao instantly replied in denying infringement. In today’s post, we would like to analyze the infringement issues of Toutiao from the legal prospective.
First is to introduce the push approach of Toutiao. When visiting its official website on a computer, it is found to be relatively regulated, similar with the news channel of Baidu and Google, that every recommended news had an abstract linking to the original website which published the news.
P&G vs. Vidal Sassoon Hairs School’s Judgment Abstract
(By Luo Yanjie) An enterprise name attempting to use a well-known trademark is quite the norm in China. In today’s post, we would like to introduce a typical case where the courts made a final judgment that the infringer constitutes infringement but does not change its enterprise name. However, the judgment is far from playing its role in the containment of this violation.
Introduction to the Case:
Appellant (Defendant at the first instance): Beijing Royal VIDAL SASSOON Beauty Hair School (the “Royal School”)
China Court Affirmed the Exception for Registration of Geographical Name Trademark
(By Luo Yanjie) According to the Trademark Law, the geographical names of administrative divisions at or above the county level, and foreign geographical names well-known to the public shall not be used as trademarks, except for geographical names that have other meanings or are not geographically-oriented. However, under certain circumstances, geographical trademarks shall, if they are of sufficient distinctiveness as a whole, may be considered to have the requisite requirements of distinctiveness. In today’s post, we will introduce such a typical case for our readers.
Why China Court Decision Requires Software Interface Primary Aesthetics under Protection?
(By Luo Yanjie) Pursuant to the Copyright Law, the works shall be original with primary aesthetics. From this point, most software interface can’t receive protection from the Copyright law, because most software interfaces are designated in a simple arrangement for the purpose of easy-to-use and thus are likely to be considered as lack of “distinctiveness”. The judgment in the following case set forth the theory.
Introduction to the Case:
Appellant (defendant at first instance): Shenzhen Tenda Technology Co., Ltd (the “Tenda”)
China Laws and Regulations Update in May 2014
- National Development and Reform Commission of PRC Promulgates Foreign Investment Project Approval and Record Management Rules
The National Development and Reform Commission of the People’s Republic of China promulgated the Foreign Investment Project Approval and Record Management Rules on April 8th 2014. The Rules have effect from May 1st, 2014.
The Rules were made to do away with provisions that mark distinctions between overseas investment in resources and investments in other areas, except for those in connection with sensitive countries, territories or sectors. According to the Rules, the National Development and Reform Commission is entitled to assess and approve the overseas investment projects where Chinese investors contribute no less than USD 1 billion, while those with contributions of less than USD 1 billion by Chinese investors shall be put on record, no matter whether the projects relate to resource development or not. Before the Rules became effective, the minimum amount of Chinese investors’ contribution to overseas investment projects for resource development that the National Development and Reform Commission had the right to assess and approve were USD 300 million and that to other overseas investment projects were USD 100 million.
China Laws and Regulations Update in April 2014
- Shanghai Customs Reform the Supervision and Administrative System of the Shanghai Free Trade Zone in Eleven (11) Respects
In response to AQSIQ’s (General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China) issuance of the Notice on Supporting Animals and Plants Inspection and Quarantine Reforms in the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone on March 4th, Shanghai Customs has launched a series of administrative system reforms in eleven (11) respects, introducing a negative list, entitlements to ‘post customs declaration’, ‘free freight transport,’ ‘unified customs declaration’ , a list of goods applied to simplified import filing procedures, etc. to the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone.
Why China‘s Courts Decided the Enterprise’s Use of “Personal Edition” Software Constitute Non-infringement?
(By Luo Yanjie) Rhino Software Inc. developed the Serv-U software, a kind of widely adopted FTP server terminal software to help the transmission of documents on websites. In recent years, Rhino Software Inc has been continuously trying to enforce its rights against unauthorized use of Serv-U in China, but the results are not satisfied. In our previous Questions and Solutions to Enforcement of Rights Protection By Overseas Software Enterprise in China, we had analyzed the reasons why Rhino Software Inc encountered obstacles in its protection. That the trial version for 30-days free use made Rhino Software Inc unable to the affirmation of infringement was the reason why Rhino Software failed in today’s post.
Could A Prior User Constitute Trademark Infringement against the Exclusive Right Holder of a Registered Trademark?
(By Luo Yanjie) Our former trademark laws had not yet stipulated whether a prior user constituted trademark infringement against the exclusive right holder of a registered trademark. However, the implementation of the update Trademark Law this year solved the problem. In today’s post, we will introduce a typical case concerning the prior user succeeded in competing against the exclusive right holder. Even though the case was judged before the implementation of the update Trademark Law, its judgment was kept pace with legislative purpose of the update Trademark Law.