Page 96 - 2016_WhitePaper_web
P. 96
6 White Paper on the Business Environment in China
defendant Guangzhou Quna Information Technology Co., 3. Copyright infringing cases involving seven people in-
Ltd. was formerly established on December 10, 2003, and
changed to its present name on May 26, 2009 having a scope cluding Zhou Zhiquan
of business similar to that of the plaintiff. On June 6, 2003,
the domain name “quna.com” was registered and in May (1) Basic introduction to the case:
2009 it was transferred to the defendant. Then the defendant The defendant Zhou Zhiquan set up and registered the
registered domain names including “123quna.com”, etc. and Beijing Xintian Yiping Technology Co., Ltd. in August 2008
used the names of “quna.com” to advertise and operate pub- to operate the website, silu.com. From January 2009 to April
licly. The plaintiff commenced a lawsuit on the grounds that 2013, the defendant Zhou Zhiquan hired the defendants Su
the above-mentioned acts by the defendant constituted unfair Liyuan, etc., to upload a large amount of music soundtracks
competition. The Guangzhou Intermediate People’s Court and movie productions, of which the copyrights are owned by
in the first instance ordered the defendant to stop using the others, to silu.com through the form of BT and organized a
above mentioned enterprise names, service logos, and domain membership system for more than 26,000 registered members
names and required the defendant to transfer the above men- to download these movies and music without approval of the
tioned domain names to the plaintiff within a specific period copyright owners. silu.com also ran advertisements and made
of time. The defendant appealed. The Guangdong High Peo- profit through selling website registration invitation codes
ple’s Court held, during the second instance, that the use of and VIP memberships. From May 2012 to April 2013 the
the enterprise name “quna” and the logos including “quna”, defendant Kou Yujie hired the defendants Cui Bin, etc., to
etc. did constitute acts of unfair competition. The defendant copy movies with the copyrights owned by others onto more
had lawful rights and interests in the domain name “quna. than 4,000 hard disks and sold them via Taobao, without the
com”. Though the defendant reserves the right to continue to approval of the copyright owners. The Beijing Haidian Dis-
use the domain names such as “quna.com”, etc., it also has the trict People’s Court of the first instance held that the defen-
obligation to add a distinguishing logo on its search links and dants’ acts all constituted infringement of copyright, a pun-
websites that are relevant to the domain name so consumers ishable offense. After the consideration of mitigated or lighter
can distinguish the above mentioned domain names with the punishment or probation based on their respective role in the
specific name of plaintiff’s famous service. The court of the joint crime and their attitude towards confession, the Court
second instance maintained the original judgment requiring sentenced the defendants to a fixed-term imprisonment rang-
the defendant to stop using the enterprise name of “quna” and ing from one to five years and a fine. After the judgement of
the logos of “quna”, etc., revoked the judgment requiring the the first instance, the defendants Su Liyuan and Kou Yujie
defendant to stop using the domain names of “quna.com” etc. filed an appeal. The Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court
and revoked the requirement of the defendant to transfer the rejected the appeal and sustained the lower court.
above mentioned domain names to the plaintiff within a spe- (2) Significance:
cific period of time, and adjusted the compensation amount The Si Lu website had uploaded high-definition informa-
to only RMB250, 000. tion and movies with links to its internet forum providing
paid downloads of a large amount of movies, TV series, and
(2) Significance: other pirated resources, through which Si Lu website accu-
This case distinguishes the different judgment standards of mulated a significant amount of registered users and became
similar domain names, similar trademarks, and the principles the most popular website for high-definition pirated movies.
of handling contradicting legal rights. In this case, the two This judgement has important significance with regard to the
parties’ domain names have been registered according to the crime of copyright infringement over the internet and the
law and have lawful domain name rights and interests. Nei- protection of intellectual property.
ther party may usurp the production space of the other party
due to the increase of popularity in the course of operation. 4. The case of preliminary restraining order on “Netease
Where the two parties have conflicts regarding the legitimate
rights and interest of the domain names, they both should Cloud Music” infringement dispute.
have the obligation to tolerate and may not maliciously pur-
sue the reputation of the party with higher popularity to seek (1) Basic introduction to the case:
unjustifiable interests. Therefore, the court of the second in- In November 2014, Shenzhen Tencent Inc. (hereinafter re-
stance revoked the judgment ordering the defendant to stop ferred to as “Tencent”) filed a restraining order in the Wuhan
using its domain names but required it to fulfil the obligation Intermediate People’s Court, requesting the following: order
of adding a distinguishing logo. Guangzhou NetEase Computer System Co., Ltd. (hereinaf-
ter referred to as “Guangzhou NetEase”) to stop sharing 623
96 songs including the song “Shi Jian Dou Qu Na Le,” of which
the exclusive copyrights are owned by Tencent, with the public
through the “NetEase Cloud Music” platform; order China
defendant Guangzhou Quna Information Technology Co., 3. Copyright infringing cases involving seven people in-
Ltd. was formerly established on December 10, 2003, and
changed to its present name on May 26, 2009 having a scope cluding Zhou Zhiquan
of business similar to that of the plaintiff. On June 6, 2003,
the domain name “quna.com” was registered and in May (1) Basic introduction to the case:
2009 it was transferred to the defendant. Then the defendant The defendant Zhou Zhiquan set up and registered the
registered domain names including “123quna.com”, etc. and Beijing Xintian Yiping Technology Co., Ltd. in August 2008
used the names of “quna.com” to advertise and operate pub- to operate the website, silu.com. From January 2009 to April
licly. The plaintiff commenced a lawsuit on the grounds that 2013, the defendant Zhou Zhiquan hired the defendants Su
the above-mentioned acts by the defendant constituted unfair Liyuan, etc., to upload a large amount of music soundtracks
competition. The Guangzhou Intermediate People’s Court and movie productions, of which the copyrights are owned by
in the first instance ordered the defendant to stop using the others, to silu.com through the form of BT and organized a
above mentioned enterprise names, service logos, and domain membership system for more than 26,000 registered members
names and required the defendant to transfer the above men- to download these movies and music without approval of the
tioned domain names to the plaintiff within a specific period copyright owners. silu.com also ran advertisements and made
of time. The defendant appealed. The Guangdong High Peo- profit through selling website registration invitation codes
ple’s Court held, during the second instance, that the use of and VIP memberships. From May 2012 to April 2013 the
the enterprise name “quna” and the logos including “quna”, defendant Kou Yujie hired the defendants Cui Bin, etc., to
etc. did constitute acts of unfair competition. The defendant copy movies with the copyrights owned by others onto more
had lawful rights and interests in the domain name “quna. than 4,000 hard disks and sold them via Taobao, without the
com”. Though the defendant reserves the right to continue to approval of the copyright owners. The Beijing Haidian Dis-
use the domain names such as “quna.com”, etc., it also has the trict People’s Court of the first instance held that the defen-
obligation to add a distinguishing logo on its search links and dants’ acts all constituted infringement of copyright, a pun-
websites that are relevant to the domain name so consumers ishable offense. After the consideration of mitigated or lighter
can distinguish the above mentioned domain names with the punishment or probation based on their respective role in the
specific name of plaintiff’s famous service. The court of the joint crime and their attitude towards confession, the Court
second instance maintained the original judgment requiring sentenced the defendants to a fixed-term imprisonment rang-
the defendant to stop using the enterprise name of “quna” and ing from one to five years and a fine. After the judgement of
the logos of “quna”, etc., revoked the judgment requiring the the first instance, the defendants Su Liyuan and Kou Yujie
defendant to stop using the domain names of “quna.com” etc. filed an appeal. The Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court
and revoked the requirement of the defendant to transfer the rejected the appeal and sustained the lower court.
above mentioned domain names to the plaintiff within a spe- (2) Significance:
cific period of time, and adjusted the compensation amount The Si Lu website had uploaded high-definition informa-
to only RMB250, 000. tion and movies with links to its internet forum providing
paid downloads of a large amount of movies, TV series, and
(2) Significance: other pirated resources, through which Si Lu website accu-
This case distinguishes the different judgment standards of mulated a significant amount of registered users and became
similar domain names, similar trademarks, and the principles the most popular website for high-definition pirated movies.
of handling contradicting legal rights. In this case, the two This judgement has important significance with regard to the
parties’ domain names have been registered according to the crime of copyright infringement over the internet and the
law and have lawful domain name rights and interests. Nei- protection of intellectual property.
ther party may usurp the production space of the other party
due to the increase of popularity in the course of operation. 4. The case of preliminary restraining order on “Netease
Where the two parties have conflicts regarding the legitimate
rights and interest of the domain names, they both should Cloud Music” infringement dispute.
have the obligation to tolerate and may not maliciously pur-
sue the reputation of the party with higher popularity to seek (1) Basic introduction to the case:
unjustifiable interests. Therefore, the court of the second in- In November 2014, Shenzhen Tencent Inc. (hereinafter re-
stance revoked the judgment ordering the defendant to stop ferred to as “Tencent”) filed a restraining order in the Wuhan
using its domain names but required it to fulfil the obligation Intermediate People’s Court, requesting the following: order
of adding a distinguishing logo. Guangzhou NetEase Computer System Co., Ltd. (hereinaf-
ter referred to as “Guangzhou NetEase”) to stop sharing 623
96 songs including the song “Shi Jian Dou Qu Na Le,” of which
the exclusive copyrights are owned by Tencent, with the public
through the “NetEase Cloud Music” platform; order China
