email Archives - Bridge IP Law Commentary

Should Chinese Enterprise Employees Who Have Not Signed An NDA Still Have A Duty to Not Disclose?

Posted on June 11, 2013 by yytbest

Abstract

(By Albert Chen) In practice, we have seen numerous companies not signing any NDA or confidential clauses in employment contracts with their staff. But even so, taking into consideration confidentiality measures taken by a company, like making requirements for the handling of client information, and taking into consideration the confidential content of said information, one could easily conclude most companies intend to maintain nondisclosure of confidential information, and as a corollary staff and employees also maintain these efforts at nondisclosure.

Introduction and Interpretation on China’s Judicial Interpretation of the Right to Network Dissemination of Information, II

Posted on February 28, 2013 by yytbest

Today, we are going to continue our interpretation of the “Regulation on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in Hearing Civil Disputes on Infringement against the Right to Network Dissemination of Information” (the “Network Interpretations”), basing on the review over the legislature on the right of information communication by networks in China:

Part II, Explanation of Network Interpretations

1. PSP users cannot claim to be free of liability on the basis of a personal use defense.

Regulation on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in Hearing Civil Disputes of Infringement against Information Network Broadcasting Rights by the Supreme People’s Court

Posted on February 22, 2013 by yytbest

Adopted at the 1561^st Session of the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People’s Court on November 26, 2012, and came into effect from January 1, 2013.

For the purpose of correctly trying civil disputes of infringement of information network broadcasting rights, lawfully protecting the right of information network communication, promoting the healthy development of the information network industry and maintaining the public interest, according to the General Principles of Civil Law of the PRC, the Tort Liability Law of the PRC, the Copyright Law of the PRC, the Civil Procedure Law of the PRC and other relevant laws and regulations, in combination with civil trial practice, the regulation is made as follows:

360 vs Tencent: The Summary of Anti-Monopoly Court Hearing

Posted on April 18, 2012 by You Yunting

On 18th April, 2012, Guangdong Higher People’s Court heard the case of monopolized status dispute filed by Qihoo 360 (NYSE: QIHU) against Tencent (HKEX: 700), with the claim of 150 million yuan. For the background information of the case, please refer to Wiki and a letter from Zhou Hongyi, the CEO of Qihoo 360 to his employees.

The information disclosed from the indictment of Qihoo 360:

I. The request of Qihoo 360

Demanding Tencent to cease the infringement of abusing its market monopoly status, including but not limited to cease the limitation on the transaction between QQ user and Qihoo 360, selling the safeguard software in QQ; demanding the joint compensation by the defendants to the losses of RMB 150 million yuan and the apology to Qihoo 360, also the expenses of reasonable costs and lawsuit fee paid by Qihoo 360 shall also be borne by Tencent.

Bridge IP Law Commentary

Your Guide to China IP Law！

Tag Archives: email

Should Chinese Enterprise Employees Who Have Not Signed An NDA Still Have A Duty to Not Disclose?