(By You Yunting) A post named the Teenagers Cannot Be Bullied was made by a 19-year-old student to complain that Youku.com ripped off his idea, causing a big stir online. The 19-year-old student and his fellows succeeded in taking photos of the earth from flying a hot-air balloon and then published their experience named the Kids Who Chase the Balloon and photos online. Afterwards, staffs from Youku.com contacted him, saying that they would like to address a short video to write down their behaviors. Then they reached an agreement through emails that the 19-year-old student and his fellows would cooperate with Youku.com in making a creative short video from the post the Kids Who Chase the Balloon.
(By Wang Ting) Recently, China State broadcast CCTV, imposed Apple Inc. that its iPhone’s ability to track and time-stamp user’s frequent locations without user’s permission infringed user’s privacy. Even though the news impacts turned out to be small in western countries, large amounts of Medias in China reported the news (Note: the link is in Chinese). Within the quicker development of internet and mobile internet, personal data and information has become increasingly frequent cross region and even breaking national boundaries, thus making the transfer of personal data more smoothly. In today’s post, at the beginning of Apple’s device’s location tracking abilities, we will introduce regulations and legal risks concerning how enterprises transfer user data from China to third countries.
(By You Yunting) Recently, Sohu vs Toutiao has attracted attention from the media. Sohu sued Toutiao for copyright infringement and unfair competition, whilst Toutiao filed lawsuits against Sohu for defamation. It is quite normal for two enterprises in competition to take legal proceedings against each other. However, what really surprised us was, in their dispute, that governmental officials attended Sohu’s press conference, in favor of Sohu. In today’s post, we will discuss the reason for theimproper governmental interference. Comments and suggestions are most welcome.
(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.
(By You Yunting) We have introduced that Shanghai court issued the first trade secret litigation injunction in China pursuant to the new Civil Procedure Law. Recent, Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court made a judgment in favor of U.S. drug maker Eli Lily and Company and Eli Lily (China), determining that the defendant must cease infringing the trade secret of the plaintiff. In today’s post, we will introduce the abstract the judgment following with our comments.
Introduction to the Case:
(By You Yunting) Abstract: The nature of “QVOD Business Model” is that both large and small-sized companies are to jointly infringe online copyrights. Under the facts that large companies provided technology and commerce and then small companies engaged in infringing works, such cooperation set up an environment of competitive advantages resulting from weak regulatory. This cooperation’s true cleverness comes from the deepen understanding of safe harbor rules and the Internet’s globalization and anonymity. If “QVOD Business Model” is continuous operating, such model may be cumulative legal risks and thus is likely that a criminal investigation can make an end of “QVOD Business Model”.
(By You Yunting)Abstract: The Yunnan Baiyao Group Co., Ltd had used its good historical reputation, its customer’s curiosity about its ingredients and the protection afforded to a state-secret recipe to make large profits. However, with the proliferation of awareness of an individual’s rights and the gradual strengthening of democratic consciousness, its enterprise institutions and culture are eroding consumer confidence in the brand and ruining its business reputation in the eyes of consumers.
(By You Yunting) Malicious litigation refers to instituting a lawsuit through fictional facts and falsified evidences for the purpose of receiving unlawful benefits. In today’s post, we will introduce some provisions about malicious litigation in intellectual property laws and civil procedure law in China.
I. Provisions on wrongful litigation injunction can be applied into malicious litigation.
In litigations concerning patent, trademark and copyright, the right holder always applies for such litigation injunctions as termination of infringement, evidence preservation and property preservation. Where the court approved the application, if the litigation is proved to be malicious, the respondent may require the applicant to compensate for such losses. Article 13 of the Several Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on the Issues Concerning the Application of Law to Terminating Infringement upon Patent Prior to Litigation stipulates that:
(By Luo Yanjie) Abstract: The Implementing Regulations of the Copyright law stipulates “works” under the protection of the Copyright Law shall be under originality. “Originality” can be divided into two parts: independent creation and the minimum intellectual creation.
An enterprise filed a suit to the courts, alleging the defendant copied its contractual terms. One would wonder whether the terms of a contract shall be protected by the Copyright Law. The Guangzhou Intermediate People’s Court provided an answer that the terms in a contract may not be protected by the Copyright Law owing to the expression limitation of a contract. Here are the introduction to this case and our opinions for the following.
(By Luo Yanjie) Abstract: The Copyright Law protects “expression” rather than “thought”. For the purposes of the Copyright Law, “works” refer to original intellectual creations in the literary, artistic and scientific domain, insofar as they are capable of being reproduced in a specific tangible form. Works without originality are not protected by these laws.
In recent years, there has been a serious plagiarism problem in the field of online games. Considering that online games act as computer software, laws protect its “code” other than game mode and method. The case in today’s post will elucidate this principle.
—Interpretations on Solutions to Several Issues in Hearing E-Commerce IPR Infringement Cases
In today’s post we will continue to discuss the standards to be considered in determining the liability of e-merchant platforms.
III. Standards in Determining the Indirect Infringement Liability of E-Merchant Platforms
As discussed above, an e-merchant platform may only assume indirect infringement liability under the law, and therefore it would not be necessarily always be liable for infringement occurring on its platform. The pressing question then, is what standards shall be utilized when determining their liability? In response to this question, we would like to share our analysis based on a comparison of similar statutes:
—Interpretations on Solutions to Several Issues in Hearing E-Commerce IP Infringement Cases
(By Luo Yanjie) In recent years, E-Commerce in China has thrived along with the development of online shopping. According to some news reports, the volume of the transactions from 360buy.com totaled more than RMB sixty billion Yuan, and Suning’s online sales achieved a comparatively paltry RMB 18.336 billion Yuan. With respect to Taobao.com and its affiliated websites, their business gains have vastly superseded all other rivals. By November 2012, Taobao.com and Tmall had sales of over RMB 1000 billion Yuan, which is almost three times that of Bailian Group, Suning and Gome’ s annual income in 2011 combined. The aforesaid three companies are currently the top three retail chains in China.
As reported by Mr. Chi Qiang, the chief justice of Beijing Higher People’s Court,on the 5th Session of the 13th People’s Congress of Beijing, there have judged 12, 269 IPR cases in Beijing courts of each level, which is a year by year increase of 16.3% and occupies 22.3% of all around China. For these cases, both total amount and new type case are rank first in all the courts nationwide.
Other recommended posts on our website:
1. The Actual Term of Trademark Registration in China
2. How to Apply for the Trademark Record in China Custom
3. How to improve the success rate of trademark registration in China?
4. Matters for Attention in Trademark Refusal Review in China
5. Introduction of China’s Legal System of Trademark Renewal
6. Introduction on the Regulations concerning the Capital Contribution in IPR or Domain Name in China
7. The Copyright Registration in China Could Be FREE?
8. China Copyright Protection Term Longer than EU’s?
9. Matters for Attention in the Patent Preliminary Injunction Application in China(I)