↓

Bridge IP Law Commentary

Your Guide to China IP Law!

  • Home
  • About
  • Team
  • Contact
  • Services
Bridge IP Law Commentary
Home Menu ↓
Skip to primary content
Skip to secondary content
  • Trademark
    • Registration
    • Protection
    • Settlement
  • Copyright
    • Registration
    • Protection
    • Settlement
  • Patent
    • Registration
    • Protection
    • Settlement
  • Corporation
    • Establishment
    • Operation
    • Structuring
  • Trade Secret
    • Protection
    • Litigation
  • Competition law
    • Anti-trust
    • Unfair competition
  • Laws & Regulations

Tag Archives: in both interpretations

China Revised Its Law on Jurisdiction of Internet Infringement Involving Foreign Elements

Posted on February 12, 2013 by yytbest

 (By Albert Chen) On the issue of jurisdiction in online infringement cases, Article 1 of the Supreme People’s Court’s Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning Application of Law in Hearing Network Copyright Disputes Involving Computers (the “Network Dispute Interpretation”) previously stated that:

“Online copyright infringement dispute cases are within the jurisdiction of the court in the place where infringement occurred or the residence of the defendant. The place where infringement occurred includes the place where the network server or computer terminal used to conduct the accused infringement is located. For situations where it is difficult to determine the place where the infringement occurred or the residence of the defendant, the place where the computer terminal or other device that the plaintiff used to discover the infringement is located may be used as the place where the infringement occurred.”

READ MORE
Posted in Copyright, Litigation, Protection | Tagged 2012, 2013, and etc.) to determine the place where the infringement occurred. Furthermore, and the Domain Name Interpretation primarily regulates domain name conflicts, and the Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning Application of Law in Civil Dispute Involving Domain Names (the “Domain Name Interpretation”). The relevant specific clauses are as follows: Article, and unfair competition disputes. II. Analysis of the statutory jurisdiction It could be concluded from the above regulations that the jurisdiction of network infringement cases shall belong to the cou, Apple, Article 1 of the Supreme People’s Court’s Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning Application of Law in Hearing Network Copyright Disputes Involving Computers (the “Network Dispute Interpretation”, basic level court, branch, branch or business agent is located.” So, by our judgment, China Revised Its Law on Jurisdiction of Internet Infringement Involving Foreign Elements (By Albert Chen) On the issue of jurisdiction in online infringement cases, computer terminal location, copyright, could the place where the consequence of infringement is felt include any computer terminal? Today, defendant’s domicile, differential jurisdiction, first instance jurisdiction, however, if the contract is signed or performed within the territory of the People’s Republic of China, in both interpretations, in my experience, in practice, infringement location, infringement or tort cases shall be brought to the court of the infringement place or the domicile of the defendant. The infringement place may include the place where the infringement takes place or , integrated circuit layout design, intermediate court, is an American company. Therefore, judicial jurisdiction, jurisdiction of lawsuits involving foreign elements, like stock equity, location of defendant, may be under the jurisdiction of the people’s court located in the place where the contract is signed or performed, name right, network infringement cases with foreign elements are heard in the court where the network server or computer terminal that conducted the accused infringement is located. In practice, network server, new plant varieties, or business agent within the territory of the People’s Republic of China, or the defendant has detainable property within the territory of the People’s Republic of China, or the defendant has its representative agency, or the object of the action is within the territory of the People’s Republic of China, or the representative agency, patent, place of infringement, residence of the defendant, such as the case involving Apple’s App Store. On November 26, territorial jurisdiction, the above principles are used to find jurisdiction not just for these conflicts but for all online infringements. In the case of Apple’s App Store described in the beginning of the post, the aforesaid principle is followed in domain name disputes (including copyright, the court in the place of the terminal used by plaintiff to discover the infringement has jurisdiction. The implementation of the new law will help Chinese rights holders find legal support when bring, the defendant, the defendant’s detainable property is located, the infringing act takes place, the Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning Application of Law in Copyright Disputes Involving Computer Networks (the “Network Copyright Interpretation”), the jurisdiction decision in the case is mainly based on the opinions that Apple has a branch in Beijing and detainable property, the jurisdiction for network conflicts is mainly decided in accordance with the Civil Procedure Law, the location of the computer terminal on which the plaintiff discovered the domain name can serve as the place where the infringing act took place. The basic principle of jurisdiction comes from the C, the location of the computer terminal or other equipment on which the plaintiff discovered the infringing content can act as the place where the infringing act took place. Paragraph 1 of Article 2 of , the location of the computer terminal or other equipment on which the plaintiff discovered the infringing content can be used for jurisdiction. In fact, the place of the computer where the plaintiff discovered the infringement can be taken as the place where the infringement occurred.” Based on this regulation, the place where the computer terminal or other device that the plaintiff used to discover the infringement is located may be used as the place where the infringement occurred.” Generally by this artic, the subject of the action is located, the Supreme People’s Court promulgated the Regulations on Several Issues on Application of the Law in Civil Cases Concerning the Right of Network Dissemination of Information (the “Information Network, this infringing behavior also required the use of the jurisdictional rule for cases including foreign elements. According to Article 241 of Civil Procedure Law: “A lawsuit brought against a defendant , this makes it difficult for domestic courts to hear cases like this, trade name, trademark, unfair competition, we introduced the objection to jurisdiction Apple submitted to the Beijing Second Intermediate Court after it was sued by the China Writers Alliance over downloads in Apple’s App Store. In China, we will introduce the relevant system. I. Regulations on Judicial Jurisdiction Currently, well-known trademark, when the terminal of the infringing server is in foreign countries or regions, when there is no legal way to determine the defendant’s domicile or the place of infringement, which took effect on January 1, which usually include trademark, within the PRC. Lawyer Contacts You Yunting:86-21-52134918 youyunting@debund.com/yytbest@gmail.com Disclaimer of Bridge IP Law Commentary | Leave a reply
  • Friendly Links
  • China Law Blog
  • Chinamarketing
  • PingWest
  • ©copyright
  • Policy
© 2026 - Bridge IP Law Commentary
↑