LONGAN LAW FIRMContents
LongAn IP News
Jiali Xu was invited by the Democracy and Law Times to give an in-depth interpretation of the infringement issue of DIY “Bing Dwen Dwen”
Cindy Quan was successfully selected as a training expert in the “Intellectual Property Protection Service Expert Database” of the Beijing Patent Attorneys Association
The Winter Olympics movie “Breaking Through”, in which lawyers of LongAn acted as legal counsel, was officially released
LongAn IP Case
LongAn represented a pasture import and export business company in winning a trademark invalidation lawsuit
LongAn Case Study
Arethe videos of the Winter Olympics protected by the Copyright Law?
LongAn IP News
Mr. Jiali Xu was invited by the Democracy and Law Times to give an in-depth interpretation of the infringement issue of DIY “Bing Dwen Dwen”
Recently, Mr. Jiali Xu, a senior intellectual property expert and scholar, accepted the invitation of the Democracy and Law Times to interpret the infringement issue of DIY “Bing Dwen Dwen”.
Mr. Xu said that it is not illegal to make “Bing Dwen Dwen” as long as it is not used for commercial purposes. For example, when consumers ask a merchant to make a “Bing Dwen Dwen” cake to celebrate their birthdays, they do not need to bear legal responsibility. If a merchant only makes one or two “Bing Dwen Dwen” cakes according to the requirements of individual consumers, there is no infringement involved, but if a large number of “Bing Dwen Dwen” cakes are made and sold without the authorization of the Beijing Winter Olympics Organizing Committee, it will involve infringement. Recently, a cake shop in Tianjin was investigated for selling custom-made “Bing Dwen Dwen” cakes. It was verified by the local market regulation bureau that this cake shop used WeChat to publish pictures and texts of customized “Bing Dwen Dwen” cakes with its store’s logo and sold customized “Bing Dwen Dwen” cakes without obtaining the relevant authorization of the Olympic logo. At present, the case is under further trial.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/BYiK1tZ8WEPzULmkj_H6Tw
Ms. Cindy Quan was successfully selected as a training expert in the “Intellectual Property Protection Service Expert Database” of the Beijing Patent Attorneys Association
Recently, Ms. Cindy Quan, a senior partner of LongAn Law Firm, received the letter of appointment from the Beijing Patent Attorneys Association, and was appointed as a training expert in the “Intellectual Property Protection Service Expert Database” of the Beijing Patent Attorneys Association for a period of four years.
It is the recognition of the Beijing Patent Attorneys Association to Ms. Quan for her long-term commitment to the affairs of the association. In the future, Ms. Quan will continue to actively participate in the work of the association, move forward side by side with the association, and contribute to the development of the intellectual property industry.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/-X7Ox30aTFMwyhenKtPwNg
The Winter Olympics movie “Breaking Through”, in which lawyers of LongAn acted as legal counsel, was officially released
As the only “franchise” of the Beijing Winter Olympics Organizing Committee, the film “Breaking Through”, co-produced by the Propaganda Department of the Beijing Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China and the Propaganda Department of the Heilongjiang Provincial Committee of the Communist Party of China, was officially released on February 25, 2022. Lawyers of LongAn, as the legal counsel of the producer, Beijing Guangying Siji Cultural Communication Co., Ltd., provided full legal services for the film.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/2_1qw2aSf6hV-ju6B_LWXg
LongAn IP Case
LongAn represented a pasture import and export business company in winning a trademark invalidation lawsuit
Recently, the LongAn Intellectual Property Service Team composed of three attorneys, Ms. Cindy Quan, Mr. Jianjun Fu and Ms. Jiafen Xie won the case of registered trademark being invalidated by others for a pasture company. The Beijing Intellectual Property Court rejected the plaintiff’s claim, and upheld the ruling of the CNIPA, and all 7 trademarks of our client were validated.
Our client is a company engaged in pasture import and export business and has registered 7 “TOP Hey” trademarks in Class 31 due to its business needs. Pasture Company A, a peer in the pasture industry, alleged that it owned the prior and influential “TOPHAY” trademark, claimed that our client had infringed its trade name, and filed a claim for invalidation with the CNIPA. Finally, its claim was not upheld, and the disputed trademark was validated. Subsequently, it filed the case with the Beijing Intellectual Property Court.
The court found that the evidence submitted by the plaintiff, Pasture Company A, was not sufficient to prove that its trade name had certain reputation, nor could it prove that the “TOPHAY” trademark had been used and had certain influence and popularity before our client’s trademark registration, and then rejected the plaintiff’s claim.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/IlOkAdhxNxn7o0U8gwB_jQ
LongAn Case Study
Are the videos of the Winter Olympics protected by the Copyright Law?
[Summary]
CCTV International Network Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff”) has been licensed the right to video-on-demand through mobile communication networks and broadband networks and the right to protect rights for all the programs of the Rio 2016 Olympic Games. The mobile app operated by Coolyo.com (Beijing) Information Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) offered videos of 17 games including the Olympic women’s volleyball finals and men’s basketball finals, with a total duration of 590 minutes. In addition, the above-mentioned videos were uploaded within 1 to 2 days after the game ended.
The plaintiff claimed that the defendant has set up an Olympic column in its app and the names of videos involved in the case contain “Olympics”, and sued the defendant to the Beijing Haidian District People’s Court (the court of first instance) on the grounds that the defendant infringed its right to disseminate information on the Internet. After trial, the court of first instance held that, the defendant constituted an infringement of the plaintiff’s right to disseminate information on the Internet, and ordered the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses of RMB 600,000 and a reasonable expenditure of RMB 50,000.
The defendant refused to accept the first-instance judgment, and appealed to the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (the court of second instance), which upheld the first-instance judgment.
[Court’s Point of View]
One of the focuses of the dispute in this case is whether the event programs involved in the case constitute works. The defendant argued that the event programs involved were records of the event process and did not have originality, thus not constituting works.
The court of first instance held that: firstly, the event programs involved in the case are different from the competitions themselves. They are the results of human intelligence in the fields of literature, art and science.
Secondly, the event programs involved in the case have a certain ornamental value. For example, the shooting angle of the camera position, the switching of the lens, the selection and editing of the frames, as well as the on-site commentary, the recording and arrangement of the commentary of the TV commentator, etc. all reflect the personality of the creators such as the cameramen and directors, which meets the requirements for originality of works created in a way similar to filmmaking.
Finally, the fact that the relevant event programs are disseminated on the Internet is sufficient to show that they have been fixed, reproduced and disseminated on the relevant media through digital information technology, which not only meets the requirements of “reproducibility” in the general definition of works, but also meets the requirements of “filmed on a certain medium” of film works. Therefore, the event programs involved can be protected by the Copyright Law as works similar to movies.
[LongAn Comments]
There is no unified view in China’s judicial practice on whether sports event programs can be protected by the Copyright Law and what types of works can be protected.
The implementation of the amended Copyright Law has increased the possibility of sports events being protected by the Copyright Law.
The Copyright Law amended in 2020 has come into effect on June 1, 2021. The amended Copyright Law revised the “reproducibility” to “be able to express in a certain form”, so in judicial practice, it avoids the dispute in whether the live broadcast of sports events can be “fixed” on a tangible carrier.
Moreover, the Item 9 of Article 3 of the amended Copyright Law stipulates that works include “other intellectual achievements that meet the characteristics of the work”, which expands the types of works. Therefore, the live sports programs that meet the requirements of the work can also be regarded as “other works” to be protected by the Copyright Law, even if they do not fall within the categories of works specified in Items 1 to 8.
In conclusion, if the sports event programs are not mechanically recorded by a fixed camera, and the lens, montage and editing techniques are used in the production process, and the shooting angle of the camera, the switching of the lens, the scene and object selection, frame selection, editing, choreography, and off-screen commentary all reflect the individual choices and arrangements of the creators such as cameramen, screenwriters, directors, etc., then they have originality, and can be regarded as works similar to movies (now audiovisual works), which can be protected by the Copyright Law.
Therefore, during the Winter Olympics, in order to avoid the risk of copyright infringement, the online platforms should not broadcast sports events or provide video recordings of the games without authorization. Individuals are also not allowed to disseminate clips of sports event programs at will, such as using clips of sports event programs on We Media platforms. Otherwise, there may be a risk of infringement.
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/pTgQu4RlIX57oBbrYuGqnQ
For more detailed information, please follow us on: