Category Archives: Settlement

Has Apple Protected Its APP through the BSA？

Posted on by

The Second Record of the Day Four of the US Visit

(By You Yunting) In late March, the author had the opportunity to make a journey to the United States at the invitation of the U.S. government in order to better understand how the U.S. IPR system operates. On the morning of the fourth day of the journey, the writer visited the Business Software Association (BSA), which originally was not on the list of places to visit; it was later added on the recommendation of the writer. Despite this, the BSA received us with a chief inspection officer. The following is a record of our discussion carried out on that day. The topic of this post only concerns part of the discussion, and the reader may skip to the last part of this article if it interests you.

READ MORE

Does Running Game Cheating Programs Violate the Criminal Law in the United States?

Posted on by

—Day four of the visit to the United States

(By You Yunting) Beginning at the end of this March, on the invitation of the US government, the writer visited America with other Chinese legal experts with the goal of understanding its IPR system. On the fourth day, the writer visited the US Justice Department’s Bureau of Computer Crimes and IPR, the Department of Homeland Security’s IPR Coordination Center, and the American Chamber of Commerce. The following is the brief record of the writer’s experiences that day:

READ MORE

What Chinese Intellectual Property Legal Issues Are American Companies Dissatisfied With?

Posted on by

Day three of the visit to the United States

(By You Yunting) Beginning at the end of this March, on the invitation of the US government, I visited America with the goal of understanding its IPR system. On my third day in the US, I visited the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (“PhRMA”), the United States-China Business Council (“USCBC”), the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), and the East Asia Bureau of the US Department of State. The following is the brief record of my meetings on that day.

READ MORE

Why China Should Revoke the Regulations Which May Put All the Piracy Selling Vendors into Jail?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) You could find the vendors selling the pirated films, TV dramas, music or software in almost each single street in the cities of China. And according to the current regulation that the amount of the sales totaled 500 discs could be prosecuted for the criminal law violation, any vendors who has been selling the pirated discs for at least one month could constitute the crime of copyright infringement, and to be sent in to jail. Despite what the vendor has done may damage the IPR of the copyright holder, it is fair to combat them under the laws and regulations. But it seems that the existing judicial interpretation has a too wide governing scope, and could have damaged the purpose of the Criminal law. And in the practices, the vendors who have been prosecuted for their piracy selling could be less than 1% of all. Thus it has made the vendors do not care the punishment regulated in the criminal law, and that on the other hand has broken the principle “any violation against the criminal law shall be prosecuted and punished”, and thereafter it may promote the law enforcement upon the selection or the law enforcement in the political campaign or the rule of man. And the at the same time, it could harm the IPR protection.

READ MORE

How does the U.S. Government Guide Companies Registering IPR in China?

Posted on by

(By You Yunting) This March, at the invitation of the U.S. government, Mr. You Yunting, the founder of Bridge IP Commentary began his journey to the United States. The main purpose of this visit was to better understand the system of intellectual property rights in the United States. Mr. You would like to share with our readers his experiences there in several posts here on our website. Of course, the content of the posts may not be truly comprehensive or strictly accurate; that being said, if you find any mistakes or comments that can be corrected or improved upon, please let us know. We encourage more dialogue with the IPR community and welcome all constructive commentary. The following is the first post in a series of Mr. You’s visit to the United States: 

READ MORE

Analysis of the Assumption of Liability for E-Merchants in IPR Disputes in China, II

Posted on by

—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:

READ MORE

Analysis of the Assumption of Liability for E-Merchants in IPR Disputes in China, I

Posted on by

—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.

READ MORE

Is It Necessary to Receive Approval from the Rights Holder of an Original Work in Order to Use Adapted Work?

Posted on by
s2366722

(By Luo Yanjie) Recent internet news has stated that the film adaption rights for Big Breast & Wide Hips, the work of 2012 Nobel laureate, Mo Yan, have sold for RMB 11,180,000 yuan, and the film will be directed by Zhang Yimou. Although Mo Yan’s agency ultimately confirmed that this was a false rumor, the cinematographic adaption of Mo Yan’s work has garnered public attention. With the trend of greater diversity in forms of work, we have seen more and more works recomposed in other artistic forms. Legally speaking, this re-composition actually belongs to adaption under the Copyright Law, and the work created is therefore adapted work. Today’s post will introduce the Chinese system for adaption of the film and cinematographic works.

READ MORE

Comparison of Administrative and Judicial Methods of Domain Name Dispute Settlement in China

Posted on by

(By Albert Chen) Currently, the main dispute resolution channels for domain name disputes include semi-administrative settlement and judicial settlement. In terms of regulation, the Measures for Settlement of Domain Name Disputes (the “Measures”) were promulgated as early as 2002 and then amended in 2006. The Measures are the primary basis for semi-administrative settlement of domain name dispute. As to judicial methods, the main basis is the Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning Application of Law in the Hearing of Computer Network Civil Disputes” (the “Interpretation”) promulgated by the Supreme People’s Court.

READ MORE

Are New Rules on Internet Publication from GAPP against State Council’s Regulations?

Posted on by
GAPP

(By You Yunting) Abstract: By the “Management Measures of Internet Information Services” (the “Measures”) issued by the State Council, China will carry out a new system of filing and recording to those non-operating Internet information services, namely those services involving the open sharing of information. These websites falling within the measures shall undertake the recording and filing procedures laid out before publishing any and all information. Yet, the situation seems to have undergone some changes with the promulgation of the working draft of the “Management Regulations of Network Publishing Services” (the “Regulations”), wherein most information released onto the network would be deemed so-called “network publishing.” As provided in the Regulations, no matter whether the service is operating or non-operating, the requirements for a Network Publishing Service License (the “License”) shall apply. It can be easily seen that such regulations are being made that are essentially beyond any lawful authorization, and are in fact contrary to rules previously issued by the State Council.

READ MORE

Why a Chinese Court Judged Apple Inc. to Be the Actual Operator of the AppStore Rather than iTunes S.A.R.L?

Posted on by
u=2609607523,3788351582&fm=23&gp=0

(By Albert Chen) Recently, in the right to network dissemination of information dispute between Li Chengpeng, a well-known Chinese writer, and Apple, a Beijing judge held Apple as the actual operator of the App Store, even though the company had maintained that iTunes S.A.R.L (“iTunes”) is the actual operator, a fact afterwards admitted by iTunes. So, today’s post will introduce the reasoning used by the first instance court in its decision.

Li filed the lawsuit with the Beijing No.2 Intermediate People’s Court (“Intermediate Court”) on January 16, 2012, claiming that his latest work “李可乐抗拆记” was made into an app downloadable in App Store for free reading, which infringed his right to network dissemination of information. Additionally, as the operator, manager, and owner of the App Store, Apple should assume liability. Based on these points, Li demanded compensation for economic damages in the amount of 305,000 yuan and reasonable expenses in the amount of 5,425 yuan.

READ MORE

How to Determine Infringement Conducts in Copyright Disputes in China Courts?

Posted on by

(By Luo Yanjie) The Getty Images (Beijing) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Getty”) provided the court with a product brochure naming defendants Shanghai Shuote Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Shuote”) and Shanghai Yikang Co., Ltd. (the “Yikang”). Getty claimed that the brochure was procured from the 6th International Tire Exhibition in Shanghai during 19th to 20th of May 2009. The defendant argued that they had neither printed nor used the brochure. However, the plaintiff provided substantial evidence to prove that the brochure could only have been printed by the defendant; regardless, the defendants failed to provide any explanation proving otherwise. On the other hand, the court had solid reasons to presume both defendants had engaged in the printing and using of the brochure.

READ MORE

Analysis on the Assumption of Liability in the Serv-U Infringement Lawsuit in China

Posted on by

(By Luo Yanjie) Serv-U is a kind of widely adopted FTP server terminal software, and its main function is to help the transmission of documents on websites. Because the software is relatively small and the normal user has no way to sense the server terminal, many domestic websites in China are now using pirated Serv-U. For this reason, Rhino Software Inc., the developer of Serv-U has been continuously fighting against the piracy of its software, a story which has recently been widely reported. The list of companies sued includes LockLock from South Korea, as well as Netac and eMule, among others. The compensation claimed in these cases ranges from half a million yuan to 1.99 million yuan.

READ MORE

Is It Copyright Infringement to Perform “Gangnam Style” at a Corporate Annual Gala in China?

Posted on by
506313c1c4cc11b2309016

(By You Yunting) PSY, the most popular South Korean Artist, has achieved more than 1 billion clicks, or views, on Youtube for his music video “Gangnam Style,” and has earned a global reputation. To perform Psy’s signature “horse-riding” dance has become an integral part of domestic corporate annual galas in China. In fact, the partners of our law firm have been encouraged by colleagues to perform the dance for everyone’s amusement. The problem was that none of us could actually perform the “horse-riding” dance properly. When facing such horrible demands from coworkers, a question raised by one of our associates interested me: would a performance of “Gangnam Style” infringe others’ lawful rights?

READ MORE

China Court: AppStore Could Not Enjoy Safe Harbor Principle in Apple VS. Writer Alliance (Updated)

Posted on by
u=1734199546,1181443474&fm=23&gp=0

(By You Yunting) Update: Apple made the following statement to the recently made court decision:

In AppStore, Chinese users could get more than 700,000 best apps from Apple developers. And as a holder of intellectual property, it has always been Apple’s awareness the importance of IPR protection, and thereby we carefully treat each infringement complaint. Apple cherishes the opinions and advices put forward by China Written Works Copyright Society, China Writers Association and Internet Society of China. For a better aid to the right protection of the content owners, Apple would continue improving the service quality.

READ MORE