Tag Archives: public domain

Comments on the Decided Case of “Explaining Pictures” from Three Lives and Three Worlds Woven Together by Secrets

Posted on by

(By Ni Tinggang) Beijing Internet Court recently closed a case arising from the right to transmit information on the internet, in which the defendant Shenzhen Shushu Technology Co., Ltd. (“Defendant”) transmitted a continuous series of pictures from the TV series Three Lives and Three Worlds Woven Together by Secrets (“Episodes in Dispute”) by using the method of “explaining a movie with pictures”, infringing the right to transmit on the internet proprietary information of the plaintiff Youku Network Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd. (“Plaintiff”). The court decided the identity of the infringing person and the exclusion of reasonable use for good reasons. However, I have noticed that the type of works in question and the plaintiff’s eligibility decided by the court is questionable and worth discussion.

READ MORE

Can Software User Interface be Protected by China Copyright Law?

Posted on by

Abstract

(By Albert Chen) User Interfaces (UI) are generally excluded from copyright protection, because a UI simply allows the software to be used by displaying various methods of operation; that being said, because UIs are all essentially limited by incorporating similar functions, similar kinds of software inevitably reach creative limits in expression of UI layouts and specification of features and functions. Looking at UIs in another way, the basic UI layout and framework essentially enter the public domain, and ergo are not afforded protection under the Copyright Law.

READ MORE

How to Acquire the Trademarks of Companies Whose Business Have Been Canceled or Whose Licenses Have Been Revoked in China?

Posted on by

By Albert Chen

Trademark assignees may sometimes encounter an awkward situation: the target trademark is in the hands of a company that has had its business license revoked or that has been cancelled. Although the trademark is still valid, others seem to have no legitimate means to acquire it. So, under these circumstances, does the assignee really have no means to acquire the trademark? In today’s post, you will find the answer.

I. Why would trademarks be left unused?

According to relevant statistics, the average life of Chinese companies is seven years, and the average of life of privately owned companies is only 2.9 years. On the other hand, however, the validity period of a trademark is ten years, and there is nothing in Chinese law that states that the trademark shall automatically become invalid when the business license of its holder is revoked or the company is cancelled. Especially when the business license has been revoked, the company still has legal capacity. It is merely incapable of conducting civil acts, including the use and transfer of trademarks, because its business license or chop has been announced invalid or has been confiscated under the punishment of business license revocation.

READ MORE

How to Legally Use Mickey Mouse Brand and FIgure in China?

By You Yunting

About one month before, the IPR Committee of Shanghai Bar Association invited the police officer from the Economic Investigating Squadron of Shanghai Police Department to deliver a speech on the criminal protection over IPR issues. And in the communication after the seminar, the police officer raised a question to the acceded lawyers, “The Shanghai Disney Land will be constructed several years later, and it’s foreseeable that there could be stores selling Mickey Mouse or other figures articles with no license thereby granted around the park. Yet, by then, the copyright protection term on Mickey could be expired, and so what measures could be taken to strike the unlicensed using or selling?”

READ MORE

Shall Figure of Mickey be Protected by Copyright Law in DPRK?

Posted on by

By Albert Chen

Mickey Mouse’s showing up in the show for Kim Jong-un, the new leader of DPRK, has provoked the coverage of news reports worldwide. The swift reaction by Disney stated that “This was not licensed or authorized by The Walt Disney”, which in turn made the event gather more controversy. Moreover, the State Council of USA also expressed its concern on the issue.

Not limited to the politics behind the event, the copyright matters involved in the character performance is also very interesting. This brings forth the question; does the performance constitute the infringement against Disney? In my opinion, the answer to the question shall lay on the answers to another two more basic questions: 1) Is Mickey Mouse still in his protection period? 2) Could copyright be protected through DPRK and USA?

READ MORE