(By Luo Yanjie) In a civil lawsuit, the collecting of evidence for the purpose of notarization is quite common. However, during the process of collecting evidence that concerns the selling of infringing goods, the rights holders or their attorneys typically utilize a system of collection in which they set up a “customer” to purchase the infringing product as evidence of infringement. So the question is, should evidence collected in this manner be considered legally effective for the purposes of a lawsuit for infringement or unfair trade practice? For our understanding on the issue, and our experience in this decidedly complicated process, we would like to share with our readers today’s post concerning our opinions on the issue:
By You Yunting
Taobao.com is the biggest e-commerce website in China, it is mainly engaged in platform providing rather than doing the business itself. Therefore, all the products sold on it were by third parties, and its platform could be divided into Taobao market and Tmall. In last month, Jack Ma, CEO of Alibaba Group, published the annual total turnover of Taobao.com will supersede the sum up of eBay (NASDAQ: EBAY) and Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) (note: the link is in Chinese). However, on the other hand, with the increasing of the transaction, the risk of intellectual property of the website is also growing, and in fact, we have seen it on the list of notorious market by USA government. In the mean time, considering the strengthened strike on infringements on Taobao.com, the website has been judged for joint liability in dozens of cases. Today, we would like to analyze the judgment of e-commerce’s legal liability by Chinese courts with 2 established cases.
Recently, Judge Gao Fei, from Dongcheng District People’s Court in Beijing, has published an article on the China Press and Publishing Journal, discussing the relevant problems of the electronic evidences of network copyright in China. The article analyzes the four main problems in the evidence preservation of network copyright infringement disputes due to the evidence being intangible and easy to be modified, and it also gives the solution. Bridge IP Law Commentary today will introduce you our interpretation on the article.
Highlight: The purchase of apps by black card is flooding the App Store, and the bank, seller and the sale platform, China’s C2C giant Taobao.com, are all involved in such transactions. Who is responsible, and what measures could developers or Apple take to resolve the issue? Bridge IP Law Commentary provides the below essay for consideration.
In China, the credit card thieves choose the Apple App Store to utilize their stolen cards through the purchasing of popular apps. They purchase the popular apps in the Store through the unauthorized use of stolen credit cards and then sell such apps by C2C websites like eBay. This type of transaction is called purchase by black card in China. Under such purchase, the Chinese clients could only pay 1 RMB for apps priced at 1 US dollar, though the official exchange rate is 6.5 RMB to 1 US dollar. First the prospective customer sends the seller the link of the app that the customer would like, then the seller purchases the app with the stolen credit card, and then sends the information for the customer to download the app and pay the seller. For all steps, it only cost several minutes. It’s simple and convenient, and so purchase by the black card is flooding in China. It’s even reported that the bad debt rate hereby produced is more than 80% for the App Store.