Is it infringing to use local videos to carry out false live broadcasts and self-made variety shows to invite guests to watch the opening ceremony of the event?

In the past three years, the Beijing Haidian Court has accepted a total of 4,851 intellectual property cases involving the digital economy, and concluded 1,447 cases by judgment, with a maximum compensation of more than 2,100 yuan. On April 23, the Beijing Haidian People's Court released the White Paper on Intellectual Property Adjudication of the People's Court of Haidian District, Beijing (2024) (hereinafter referred to as the "White Paper"), which not only introduced the adjudication of intellectual property cases in the digital economy in the past three years, but also released ten typical cases, including the case of using an unmanned live broadcast system to implement live broadcast cheating, the infringement case of plagiarism of online short dramas, and the "litigation source management" of a series of explanatory short video cases.

Case: Is it infringing to use local videos to fake live broadcasts and self-made variety shows to invite guests to watch the live broadcast of the opening ceremony of the event?

In recent years, with the rapid development of the digital economy, the protection of intellectual property rights related to the healthy and rapid development of the digital economy has been continuously emphasized. The Haidian court has heard many typical cases involving the digital economy and properly resolved a large number of intellectual property conflicts and disputes in the digital economy. On April 23, the Haidian People's Court released the White Paper on Intellectual Property Adjudication of the People's Court of Haidian District, Beijing (2024).

In the white paper, the Haidian court released 10 typical cases of intellectual property disputes involving the digital economy. In the unfair competition case of setting up false live broadcast titles, a computer company set up live broadcast titles such as "The 110th Chinese delegation is broadcasting the opening ceremony of an event live" in the website section of its operation, but after clicking on the title, it was the company's self-made variety show that was played, and the content of the program was to invite the guests of the program to watch the opening ceremony of the event while eating hot pot. A network company that enjoyed the exclusive right to disseminate the event program in Chinese mainland in accordance with the law sued a computer company, and the court held that the defendant's behavior constituted unfair competition and awarded it 520,000 yuan in compensation.

In the case of using an unmanned live broadcast system to carry out live broadcast cheating, the "unmanned live broadcast system" sold by the two defendants could realize the live broadcast with local video files or other users' real-time live broadcast content when the plaintiff's live broadcast platform was pushing live broadcasts, which became a tool for some anchors to cheat, hindering the normal operation of the plaintiff's live broadcast platform services, constituting unfair competition, and was ordered to compensate the operator of a live broadcast platform 1.03 million yuan.

In the infringement case of plagiarism of online novels by online short dramas, the plaintiff was authorized to have the exclusive adaptation rights, filming rights, and infringement rights of a certain online novel (hereinafter referred to as the novel in question) film and television works and videos. The plaintiff had sent the novel in question to the defendant 2 through an intermediary to negotiate the filming of the short play, but was refused. During the period when the plaintiff planned to invest in the filming of the short drama on its own, it was discovered that the two defendants had filmed the novel involved in the case into an online short drama (hereinafter referred to as the alleged infringing short drama) without authorization and broadcast it on the short video platform of the defendant 1. The two defendants were the co-investors, producers and beneficiaries of the alleged infringing short dramas, and were sentenced to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses and reasonable expenses of more than 240,000 yuan for the adaptation and filming of the novel involved in the case constituted copyright infringement.

In a series of cases involving commentary-type short videos, the plaintiff, a cultural company, was a domestic new media copyright provider, and obtained the exclusive right to disseminate information on the network and the rights to defend rights in its own name in Chinese mainland for a number of film and television works involved in the case. The influencer anchor of a media company uploaded a commentary video of the film and television works involved in the case on a short video platform operated by an information service company without permission. A cultural company argued that a media company had infringed its copyright in respect of the film and television works involved in the case, and that an information service company, as the operator of a short video platform, constituted joint infringement, and requested that the two defendants be ordered to immediately stop the infringement and jointly and severally compensate for economic losses. After accepting this series of cases, the Haidian court judged that this series of cases belonged to a batch of copyright infringement and unfair competition disputes between platforms, and that the mediation basis was good, so the series of cases were packaged and handled together, and through in-depth communication with the original defendant and both parties, it was learned that in addition to this series of cases, the plaintiff had collected evidence of other relevant infringing content of the defendant platform and was preparing to file more than 300 lawsuits. Through timely communication, building bridges, and advancing as soon as possible, the two parties sought common ground for cooperation and reached an agreement on related matters, relying on the basis of cooperation, while reaching a package settlement on the cases that have entered the litigation and more than 300 subsequent cases, and jointly promoting the development of the video industry.

The protection of platform data rights and interests has become a hot topic and a key point, and the protection of digital cultural products has attracted much attention

Yang Dejia, President of the Fifth Civil Trial Division (Intellectual Property Division) of Haidian Court, believes that intellectual property disputes involving the digital economy have shown many new characteristics and trends:

First, the protection of platform data rights and interests has become a hot topic and focus. What path should be applied to protect the rights and interests of platform data, how to regulate the improper access and use of platform data, and how to properly balance the protection of rights and interests and the free circulation of data have become issues of great concern. During the trial of a case, the case may be protected through trade secrets, or other specific provisions as provided for in Chapter II of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law or general provisions may be applied, and the competitive conduct involving platform data may be evaluated by comprehensively balancing the impact of the sued conduct on public interests such as the interests of business operators, the order of market competition, and the interests of consumers.

Second, the protection of digital cultural products has attracted much attention. With the development of the digital economy, cultural products related to digital technology are becoming more and more abundant, and the construction of digital culture has jumped to a new level. In the context of the continuous prosperity of network culture and digital culture, the protection of digital cultural products has also become a key issue in the protection of intellectual property rights. In the trial of a case, whether it is to judge the nature of the content of the request for protection or to determine whether the accused act is infringing, it is important to lift the veil of new technology, return to the purpose and principle of the law itself, and focus on the basic issues such as the person as the subject of creation, the creative behavior of people, and the intellectual achievements of people.

Third, the mode of infringement in online platforms is constantly changing. With the continuous upgrading and expansion of mobile Internet technology, the infringement of intellectual property rights is constantly changing. In the trial of a case, distinguish between different entities to determine the nature of the conduct of each party, and at the same time determine the platform's responsibility in light of the nature of the platform and the identity of the platform, and consider not only the factors clearly listed in the relevant legal provisions, but also the comprehensive judgment based on factors such as the service characteristics, business scale, and technical management level of the online platform in the specific case.

Fourth, the governance of the Internet black and gray industry needs to be strengthened urgently. The black and gray industry of the Internet is everywhere, spreading and eroding all corners of the Internet, which has seriously affected the safety of citizens' personal and property and the market order of fair competition. Therefore, the prevention and control of black ash production has also become the top priority of cyberspace governance in recent years. In the trial of the case, the consideration of the balance of interests runs through, and in the judgment of the legitimacy of the act, in addition to paying attention to the impact on the interests of the operator, the consideration of consumer rights and social public interests should be more important.

Fifth, the resolution of intellectual property disputes involving digital intelligence needs to be explored. In the context of the rapid development and iteration of the digital economy and artificial intelligence, how to properly resolve the contradictions and disputes at the forefront of the industry, strengthen the protection of digital and intelligent intellectual property rights, and promote the development of innovation and empowerment have also become one of the focuses of intellectual property judicial work. In the trial of the case, it is necessary not only to follow up and pay attention to the whole process, to study and judge each process node, so as to realize the timely and proper handling of the case, but also to cooperate internally and externally, work together to resolve the case, conduct in-depth research and discussion in the industry, and cooperate with administrative organs and industry associations to conduct collaborative research and exchanges, so as to build a full-chain protection of digital intelligence intellectual property rights.

In the past three years, the Haidian Court has adjudicated 1,447 cases involving intellectual property rights related to the digital economy, and the maximum amount of compensation awarded exceeded 20 million yuan

According to the white paper, in the past three years, the Beijing Haidian Court has accepted a total of 4,851 intellectual property cases involving the digital economy, accounting for 56.7% of all intellectual property cases, concluded 4,840 intellectual property cases in the digital economy, and concluded 1,447 cases by judgment, with a maximum compensation of more than 2,100 yuan. In 2023, the court will accept 2,841 new intellectual property civil cases, an increase of 11.8% year-on-year. A total of 3,244 civil intellectual property cases were concluded, an increase of 15.2% year-on-year, of which 1,891 cases were concluded by expedited adjudication, accounting for 58.3% of the cases concluded in the year.

Based on the characteristics and trends of the above-mentioned cases, the Haidian court put forward suggestions from the following four aspects: first, to guide enterprises to establish a sense of fairness and integrity and maintain a healthy and good competition order, second, to give full play to the role of industry associations as a bridge to build a joint force for coordinated and high-quality development, third, to enrich the service measures of administrative organs and give full play to their active and effective law enforcement capabilities, and fourth, to strengthen the legal protection function of judicial organs and improve the judicial protection mechanism for intellectual property.

The white paper summarizes the intellectual property adjudication situation of Haidian courts in 2023, and summarizes the characteristics of the cases and refines the adjudication rules from the perspective of intellectual property cases involving the digital economy, in order to provide reference for improving the quality and efficiency of adjudication of similar cases and provide useful guidance for practitioners and participants in the digital economy. The Haidian Court will take this opportunity to promote reform and innovation in the field of intellectual property adjudication, and continue to contribute judicial wisdom and strength to the construction of a leading area for the digital economy and a source of artificial intelligence innovation in Haidian.

Correspondents: Li Sidi, Shi Junwen

Text/Beijing Youth Daily reporter Dai Youqing

Editor/Zhu Wei