China Law & Policy Digest


February 10, 2004
[ China Practice \| China Law & Policy \| Topics in Chinese Law ] [ OMM Home \| Beijing \| Shanghai \| Hong Kong ]
IP law in China is increasingly the focus of great attention on part of foreign investors (as evidenced by the WTO provisions on the subject) and the domestic Chinese business community. Companies are taking their IP disputes to China's specialized IP courts. This trend will undoubtedly continue as China becomes the manufacturing hub of the world and manufacturers will naturally expand their IP battles to China. The flip side of this coin is that companies in China will enter into more and more IP licensing contracts as the commerce in IP rights in China expands. Great demands will be put on China's government agencies responsible for registration, regulation and enforcement of IP rights, as the needs for their services and intervention will increase. We are pleased to publish the inaugural issue of the OMM China Intellectual Property Law News. This will be a quarterly publication covering recent developments in this important legal specialty. Please let us know if you do not wish to continue to receive this publication, or if you have colleagues who wish to be added. Regards Howard Chao

Patents

Administrative Measures Regarding Patent Agencies

专利代理管理办法

Issuing Authority: State Administration of Intellectual Property

Date of Issuance: June 6, 2003

Effective Date: July 15, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

Patent agencies may take the form of either a partnership or a limited liability company. For a partnership, there should be at least three (3) partners and an investment of RMB50,000, while a minimum of five (5) shareholders and RMB100,000 in capital is required for a limited liability patent agency. Applications for establishment of patent agencies should be filed with provincial level intellectual property bureaus, which in turn forward the applications to the State Administration of Intellectual Property for approval. If a law firm is to apply for a license to engage in the business of a patent agency, it should have at least three (3) attorneys qualified as patent agents.

Patents

Measures Regarding Implementation of Compulsory Patent Licensing

专利实施强制许可办法

Issuing Authority: State Administration of Intellectual Property

Date of Issuance: June 13, 2003

Effective Date: July 15, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

According to these Measures, if a party qualified to exploit an invention or a utility model has made requests on reasonable terms for a license from the patent holder but failed to obtain such license within a reasonable period of time, it may apply for a compulsory patent license ("CPL") pursuant to Article 48 of the Patent Law. If a new patent represents a significant technical advance with economic benefits above and beyond a previous patent, but the implementation of the new patent relies to a great extent on the implementation of such previous patent, both the patent holders of the new and the previous patents may apply for CPL against each other under Article 50 of the Patent Law. In addition, the relevant authorities may grant a CPL to exploit an invention or a utility model in the case of a national emergency if necessitated by public interest in accordance with Article 49 of the Patent Law.

Copyright

Reply of General Office of State Development and Reform Commission on Music Copyright Royalties

国家发展改革委办公厅关于音乐著作权使用费问题的复函

Issuing Authority: State Development and Reform Commission

Date of Issuance: November 24, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

In this Reply, the General Office of the State Development and Reform Commission has clarified that music copyright royalties mean any rewards paid by music users to music owners for use of music, and that the Music Copyright Royalty Standards drafted by the Music Copyright Society of China and approved by the General Administration of Press and Publication in 2000 are for reference use only and are not mandatory. Music copyright royalties shall be determined on a case-by-case basis through negotiations between music owners and music users.

Copyright

Opinions of State Copyright Administration Regarding Copyright Protection of Computer Software

国家版权局关于对计算机软件版权保护问题的意见

Issuing Authority: State Copyright Administration

Date of Issuance: July 7, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

In reply to inquiries from the Copyright Administration of Zhejiang Province regarding a software infringement case, the SCA confirmed that if a respondent's software is substantially similar to that of the complainant and can not provide the evidence proving the legitimate source of its software, the respondent should bear the liability for copyright infringement. The SCA also explained that the non-infringement defense of limited forms of expression under Article 29 of the Regulations on Computer Software Protection should be based on the prerequisite that the suspected infringing software was independently created and that the alleged infringer has the burden of proving that the relevant forms of expression are limited.

Copyright

Implementing Measures for Administrative Sanctions for Copyright Infringement

著作权行政处罚实施办法

Issuing Authority: State Copyright Administration

Date of Issuance: July 24, 2003

Effective Date: September 1, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

The Measures have been amended in line with the PRC Copyright Law, the Implementing Regulations of the PRC Copyright Law and the Regulations on Computer Software Protection. The measures provide a formal definition of "acts of infringements," clarify the "enforcement authority" of the administrative sanctions, reaffirm the concept of "burden of proof assumed by the suspected infringer" and amend the types of "administrative sanctions."
The promulgation of the Measures is intended to enhance the transparency of administrative sanction procedures, and to further strengthen administrative sanctions against copyright infringement.

Copyright

Interpretations on Certain Issues Relating to Application of Law in Adjudication of Cases Disputes concerning Computer Network Copyrights

最高人民法院关于审理涉及计算机网络著作权纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释

Issuing Authority: Supreme People's Court

Date of Issuance: January 2, 2004

Effective Date: January 7, 2004

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

The Interpretations revise previous legislation and specify that network service providers may face civil liability if such providers distribute or provide methods or materials through the internet with clear knowledge that such methods or materials are specifically designed to avoid existing copyright owners' intellectual property rights.

Copyright

Opinions of State Copyright Administration Regarding Licensing of Copyright Business

国家版权局关于对著作权经营许可问题的意见

Issuing Authority: State Copyright Administration

Date of Issuance: June 4, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

In a reply to the Copyright Administration of Hainan Province, the State Copyright Administration confirmed that approval from the copyright administrative authority is not required when engaging in the business buying and selling copyrights. However, the agency business for the cross-border transfer or licensing of China-related copyrights is subject to licensing from the State Copyright Administration.

Trademark

Reply of State Administration for Industry and Commerce on Certain Issues Relating to Supervision of Trademarks Printing

国家工商行政管理总局关于商标印制监管有关问题的答复

Issuing Authority: State Administration for Industry and Commerce

Date of Issuance: September 18, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

The Reply confirms that printed matters for marks and symbols of both registered trademarks and non-registered trademark are regulated by the Administrative Rules for the Printing Industry. The Reply also states that it shall be deemed an infringement of the right to exclusive use of a registered trademark if a printing enterprise forges or makes, without authorization, marks and symbols of the registered trademark of others, even though the sign of registration of the registered trademark is not displayed.

Domain Names

Announcements on Improving Administration of China's Internet Domain Names

关于加强我国互联网络域名管理工作的公告

Issuing Authority: Ministry of Information Industry

Date of Issuance: July 31, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

The Ministry of Information Industry ("MII") has made three Announcements relating to the implementation of the Administrative Measures for China's Internet Domain Names (the "Administrative Measures"). The Announcements require that all entities offering domain name registration services must meet the conditions provided in Administrative Measures and must register with the MII. The Announcements also require service providers to verify domain names on file and to promptly remove any illegally used domain names within thirty days of the promulgation of the Announcements. Additionally, the Announcements call for further improvements to the implementation processes for the Administrative Measures.

Domain Names

Notice on Interpretations of the Law Regarding Qualifications of Domain Name Registration Service Providers

关于从事域名注册服务经营者应具备条件法律适用解释的通告

Issuing Authority: Ministry of Information Industry

Date of Issuance: November 20, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

This Notice further interprets Article 12 of the Administrative Measures on Network Domain Names in the People's Republic of China, and sets out detailed requirements for service providers that apply for permission to engage in domain name registration services in China.
For example, an applicant must be a legal person that has an ICP license, has at least RMB 1 million registered capital, and employs at least five (5) technicians and ten (10) customer service personnel. Applicants must also meet other requirements to ensure standardized domain name registration and online security.

Domain Names

Notice of Ministry of Information Industry on Publication of Domain Name Registration Service Providers Qualified for Registration of .cn Domain Name

信息产业部关于公布符合从事.cn域名注册服务条件的域名注册服务机构的通告

Issuing Authority: Ministry of Information Industry

Date of Issuance: November 24, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

The Notice lists the names and contact information of 13 domain name registration service providers that are qualified to register domain names with .cn and which have been duly recorded with the MII.

Others

Notice on Issuance of Intellectual Property Protection and Management Guidelines in the Construction Survey, Design, and Consulting Industries

关于印发《工程勘察设计咨询业知识产权保护与管理导则》的通知

Issuing Authority: Ministry of Construction and State Intellectual Property Office

Date of Issuance: October 22, 2003

Effective Date: October 22, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

The Guidelines are issued as a reference for the protection and management of intellectual property for enterprises in the construction survey, design and consulting industry.

The Guidelines provide information on the types of intellectual property rights involved in the processes of construction survey, construction design and construction consulting; how ownership of these types of intellectual property rights is determined; how an enterprise should protect and manage its intellectual property rights; and what constitutes intellectual property infringement together with a description of the various punishments.

Others

Notice on Issuance of Intellectual Property Administrative Measures for the Transportation Industry (Trial)

关于发布《交通行业知识产权管理办法（试行）》的通知

Issuing Authority: Ministry of Communications

Date of Issuance: November 18, 2003

Effective Date: November 18, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

The Notice states that the Measures apply to all enterprises and organizations in the transportation industry and are intended to strengthen the management, protection and exploitation of intellectual property rights.
The Measures state:

how ownership of certain intellectual property rights is determined;
how an enterprise should protect and manage its intellectual property rights;
what duties of transportation administrative agencies are subject to with respect to intellectual property protection and management;
what awards should be given for employees who create inventions; and
what punishments will result from violation of the Measures.

Others

Notice of Shanghai Municipal Government on Issuance of Opinions on Further Strengthening Work with respect to Intellectual Property in Shanghai

上海市人民政府印发关于进一步加强本市知识产权工作若干意见的通知

Issuing Authority: Shanghai Municipal Government

Date of Issuance: July 29, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

Twenty-three measures covering six major aspects are provided for in the Opinions as guidelines for promoting intellectual property ("IP") in Shanghai over the following five years. The six major aspects are:

enhancing competitive competence of enterprises by strengthening work with respect to IP;
training IP professionals through college education and scientific research institutions;
promoting IP awareness in society at large;
establishing an IP information service platform;
developing the IP service market; and
improving IP administrative systems.

Others

Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Customs Protection of Intellectual Property Rights

中华人民共和国知识产权海关保护条例

Issuing Authority: State Council

Date of Issuance: December 2, 2003

Effective Date: March 1, 2004

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

In accordance with the Customs Law of the People's Republic of China, these Regulations grant customs protection for trademark rights, copyright and copyright-related rights and patent rights (collectively referred to herein as “IP rights”) in connection with the importation or exportation of goods. Customs protection involves both registration of IP rights and detainment of goods suspected of infringement. China prohibits any cross-border trade of goods infringing IP rights.

In dealing with the registration of protected IP rights, the General Administration of Customs shall decide whether to accept the owner's application within thirty business days. The customs registration period lasts for ten years, and may be extended for another ten years upon application if the concerned IP rights are still effectively protected by relevant laws and regulations. If there are any changes to registered IP rights, the owner of such rights shall report them to the General Administration of Customs within thirty business days.

If goods being imported or exported are suspected of infringement, the owner of potentially infringed IP rights may request that local customs authorities detain the concerned goods. Authorities may detain such goods upon receipt of a request, evidentiary documents supporting such requests, and a security deposit for the value of the concerned goods. Authorities shall release detained goods if a court request for enforcement assistance is not received within twenty business days thereafter.

If customs authorities suspect goods of infringement upon registered IP rights, they shall inform the owner and detain the concerned goods if the owner submits an application and sufficient security deposit within three business days. Additionally, customs officers shall conduct an investigation within thirty business days to determine whether or not infringement has in fact occurred. By submitting a security deposit equivalent to the value of the detained goods, the consignor or consignee may request that customs authorities release detained goods. If customs authorities accept such a security deposit, determines that there was no infringement, or does not receive a court request for enforcement assistance within fifty business days after detainment of the goods, they shall release the detained goods.

After applying for customs protection, the owner of IP rights may request a court injunction to force termination of the infringement or the attachment of detained goods. Customs authorities may confiscate goods determined of infringement. Such confiscated goods may be assigned to public welfare institutions, sold to the owner of infringed-upon IP rights, publicly auctioned after the symbols of infringement are removed, or destroyed if such symbols are irremovable.

Others

Notice on Special Administration of “Pirate Servers” and “Cheat Programs”

关于开展对“私服”、“外挂”专项治理的通知

Issuing Authority: General Administration of Press and Publication，Ministry of Information Industry, and State Administration for Industry and Commerce

Date of Issuance: December 18, 2003

Source: www.law-lib.com/law

Infringement activities with respect to “pirate servers” and “cheat programs” include attacking the technical protection measures of internet games, operating internet games which have been legally published and whose copyright is owned by others, modifying program data , setting up unauthorized server networks or manufacturing counterfeit pre-paid game use cards without permission in order to make a profit.

The Notice provides three stages of this special administration: the Publicity Stage (from December 20 to December 31, 2003), the Implementation Stage (from January 1 to February 29, 2004) and the Review and Evaluation Stage (from March 1 to March 15, 2004). During the Implementation Stage, business locations dealing in pirated CD-ROMs and illegal pre-paid cards will be investigated; pirated CD-ROMs, illegal pre-aid cards and related materials will be confiscated; and the enterprises duplicating pirated CD-ROMs and manufacturing illegal pre-paid cards will be subject to punishment.

Discreet v. Shanghai Zhongle

Court: Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Copyright Infringement

Disposition: Judgment for Plaintiff, January, 2004

Plaintiff Discreet (Canada), a division of Autodesk (U.S.), discovered that defendant, Shanghai Zhongle Film & Television Co. Ltd. had without authorization installed software to which plaintiff enjoys the copyright for commercial use. Plaintiff sued for copyright infringement, requesting the court to order the defendant to stop the infringement, to delete the software, to pay damages of about RMB3.7 million and to reimburse expenses paid by Discreet.
The court decided that the defendant infringed the plaintiff's copyright and ordered an injunction, a public apology and damages of RMB500, 000 against the defendant.

Autodesk v. Union Friend

Court: Beijing First Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Copyright Infringement

Disposition: Settled, November 3, 2003

Plaintiff, Autodesk Inc., a US company, is the copyright owner of software "Edit6.0" and "Combustion2.0". It found that defendant, Union Friend Media Investment Co., Ltd, installed more than ten copies of the software into the defendant's computers without authorization. The plaintiff sued the defendant for copyright infringement and requested an injunction, an apology, damages amounting to RMB551,000 and reimbursement of reasonable expenses amounting to RMB50,000 .
The defendant argued that it obtained the software via legal channels and that it had stopped using the software immediately after it found that the software was pirated. The parties settled and agreed that the defendant would not use the software without authorization and would make a public apology in a newspaper and reimburse plaintiff's expenses amounting to RMB311, 200.

Xi'an Diamond v. CBA

Court: Beijing Second Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Copyright Infringement

Disposition: Judgment for Plaintiff, December 19, 2003

Plaintiff Xi'an Diamond Net Co. Ltd. found that the defendant, China Business Associates Inc.("CBA"), a US company, copied without authorization articles, pictures and website designs etc. from the plaintiff's website and used them on its own websites, www.america-china.com and www.meizhong.com. The plaintiff sued for copyright infringement and requested the court to order the defendant to stop the infringement, make a public apology, and pay damages of RMB300,000.
The court decided that the defendant infringed the plaintiff's copyright to the articles, pictures and website designs etc. The court awarded the plaintiff an injunction, a public apology from the defendant on its website and damages of RMB35,000.

Schneider v. Patent Review Committee

Court: Beijing High People's Court

Cause of Action: Patent Invalidation

Disposition: Judgment for Appellee, December 17, 2003

An invention patent of appellant, Schneider Electric Industries SA, a French company, was invalidated before the Patent Review Committee by a Chinese company. The appellant sued for judicial review with the Beijing First Intermediate People's Court but was rejected. The appellant then appealed to the Beijing People's High Court. The appeal court decided that the appellant's invention did not meet the patentability requirement of the Patent Law and should be invalid. The appeal court dismissed the case.

Fischerwerke v. Hangzhou Sitai & Beijing Jianghe

Court: Beijing Second Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Patent Infringement

Disposition: Judgment for defendants, December 17, 2003

Plaintiff Fischerwerke Arthur Fischer GmbH & Co. KG, a German company, claimed that the first defendant, Hangzhou Sitai Curtain Wall Equipment Co. Ltd. and the second defendant, Beijing Jianghe Curtain Wall Construction Engineer Co. Ltd., manufactured and/or offered for sale its patented products. The plaintiff filed suit with the court for patent infringement and requested the court to order the first defendant to stop infringement, to make a public apology, to destroy equipment for the production of infringing products, and to pay damages of RMB 1 million. The second defendant should take joint and several obligation.
The court decided that the defendants' technology is different from the plaintiff's patented technology and dismissed the case.

Johnson & Johnson v. TRAB

Court: Beijing First Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Trademark Infringement

Disposition: Judgment for defendant, December 19, 2003

Plaintiff Johnson & Johnson ("Johnson") registered the trademark "CAREFREE" for sanitary products in China. Zhejiang Kanfuya Healthcare Commodity Co, Ltd., applied to register a trademark "CAREFUL" for the same category of products. The application was preliminarily approved in 1997. Johnson filed opposition to the registration. The Chinese Trademark Office rejected Johnson's opposition. Johnson applied for a review before the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board ("TRAB"). The TRAB rejected Johnson's opposition. Both the Trademark Office and the TRAB decided that the formation, pronunciation, and meaning of these two marks are different and the registration of "CAREFUL" should be allowed. Johnson then sued the TRAB in May, 2003 with Beijing First Intermediate People's Court for judicial review.
The court ruled that although the first five letters of these two marks are the same, the pronunciation and the meaning of them are different and if used on the same products would not cause confusion among consumers. The court dismissed the case.

Bonneterie Cévenole SARL v. Monteque Mayjane

Court: Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Trademark infringement and unfair competition

Disposition: Judgment for plaintiff, December 29, 2003

Plaintiff Bonneterie Cévenole SARL registered the trademark "Montagut" and its logo in China for clothing products. Defendants Monteque Mayjane (Hong Kong) Fashion Company Limited, Shanghai Meizheng Garment Company Limited and Changshu Haoteba Garment Company Limited used the trademark "Monteque Mayjane" combined with a logo, which was similar to the plaintiff's registered trademark "Montagut" and its logo. Plaintiff sued the defendants for trademark infringement and unfair competition, and requested an injunction and damages of RMB1 million.
The court ruled that "Monteque Mayjane" used on the garments was confusingly similar to the plaintiff's trademark "Montagut" and infringed the plaintiff's trademark. The court awarded the plaintiff an injunction and damages of RMB500,000.

Jiang Haixin v. Philips Electronics

Court: Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Domain Name Dispute

Disposition: Judgment for defendant, December 29, 2003

Plaintiff Jiang Haixin, registered "philipscis.com" as a domain name in March 2002. Defendant, Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. ("Philips"), the owner of the trademark "PHILIPS", submitted an application to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ("WIPO AMC") in July 2002 requesting the plaintiff to transfer the domain name in dispute to the defendant. WIPO AMC ruled in September 2002 that the plaintiff should transfer "philipscis.com" to the defendant. Plaintiff sued requesting the court to cancel or refrain from enforcing the award of WIPO AMC and to confirm "philipscis.com" should be owned by the plaintiff.
The court decided that the plaintiff's domain name is similar to Philips' trademark and that the plaintiff had registered the domain name in bad faith. The court ruling supported the decision of WIPO AMC.

Guan Dongsheng v. Dow Jones

Court: Beijing First Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Copyright Infringement

Disposition: Judgment for Plaintiff, September 22, 2003

Plaintiff Guan Dongsheng wrote a stylized Chinese character "DAO" and give it to the CEO of Dow Jones Co., Ltd. ("Dow Jones"), the first defendant, as a gift. Dow Jones then used the character as its business logo on various media and materials, including, among others, the Internet, newspaper, books, outside advertisements, company brochures and other promotion materials, without the authorization of the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued Dow Jones for copyright infringement and requested the court to order the defendants to stop infringement immediately, make a public apology, compensate the plaintiff RMB 5,000,000, and reimburse cost and expenses of the litigation.
The court decided that the plaintiff's stylized Chinese character "DAO" is protected in China as a work of fine art and that Dow Jones has infringed Plaintiff's copyright for using it without authorization. The court order Dow Jones to stop the infringement, make a written apology and pay damages amounted RMB 405,684.

Toyota v. Geely

Court: Beijing Second Intermediate People's Court

Causes of Action: Trademark infringement and unfair competition

Disposition: Case dismissed, November 24, 2003

Plaintiff Toyota Motor Corporation ("Toyota"), registered its logo in China as a trademark. Geely Automobiles Co., Ltd. ("Geely"), a local car manufacturer, uses a logo on its own cars, which plaintiff alleged was similar to its registered trademark. Defendant also stated in its advertising that it used Toyota's engines. Plaintiff sued for trademark infringement and unfair competition, requesting damages of RMB 14 million.
The court decided that the two logos were different and would not cause confusion since the entire image of the two logos looked different and ordinary consumers are more likely to pay attention when buying cars. The court also decided that defendant exaggerated in its advertising, but not to the extent that it was misleading consumers. The court therefore ruled that defendant neither infringed plaintiff's registered trademark nor committed unfair competition and that the case should be dismissed.

Warner Music (HK) v. Tianhu.com

Court: Chengdu Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Copyright infringement

Disposition: Judgment for plaintiff, September 23, 2003

Plaintiffs Warner Music Hong Kong Ltd., Go East Entertainment Co., Ltd., Universal Music Group Hong Kong Ltd., found that defendant Tianhu.com Operating Information Industry Company provided, without authorization, MP3 downloading of their copyrighted music works. Plaintiffs sued for copyright infringement and requested the court to order the defendant to stop the infringement, to make a public apology and to pay damages of RMB 3.01 million.
The court decided that the defendant has infringed the plaintiffs' copyright in spite of the fact that the defendant made a statement in providing the downloading that the downloading is only for test purposes and should be deleted within 24 hours. The court ordered the defendant to stop the infringement immediately, to make a public apology and pay damages of about RMB370,000.

ETS v. New Oriental

Court: Beijing First Intermediate People's Court

Causes of Action: Copyright infringement and trademark infringement

Disposition: Judgment for plaintiff, September 27, 2003

Plaintiff Education Testing Service ("ETS") and Graduate Management Admission Council ("GMAC") had copyright registration in the US for exam papers for the Test of English as a Foreign Language ("TOEFL"), Graduate Record Examination ("GRE") and Graduate Management Admission Test ("GMAT"). They also registered "TOEFL", "GRE" and "GMAT" as trademarks in China. Defendant, New Oriental Education Group, used and published the plaintiff's test papers in its overseas English exam training without authorization. Plaintiff sued the defendant in the Beijing First Intermediate People's Court for copyright and trademark infringement, and requested the court to order the defendant to stop infringement, make a public apology, and compensate the plaintiff's economic losses.
The court decided that the defendant infringed the plaintiff's copyright and trademark, and ordered the defendant to stop infringement immediately, make a public apology, and compensate the plaintiff's economic losses amounting to over RMB 10 million.

Universal v. Ke Wen

Court: Beijing Second Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Copyright infringement

Disposition: Judgment for plaintiff, December 2003

Defendants Beijing Ke Wen Books Information Technology Co., Ltd. and two other companies, without authorization, reproduced, distributed sound recordings of the plaintiff, Universal Music Group Hong Kong Co., Ltd. The plaintiff sued for copyright infringement requesting an injunction, destruction of infringing products, a public apology and compensation of RMB368,000, covering damages and expenses for investigation and lawsuit. The plaintiff also requested that the three defendant bear joint liability.
The court decided in favor of the plaintiff and awarded an injunction, a public apology, damages of RMB120,000 and litigation costs of RMB10,000.

Sybase v. ISD

Court: Beijing First Intermediate People's Court

Cause of Action: Copyright infringement

Disposition: Judgment for claiment, July 10, 2003

Plaintiff Sybase Inc ("Sybase") is the owner of the software Sybase SQL Anywhere 5.5. It discovered that the software made by the defendant, International Software Development (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. ("ISD") linked to the plaintiff's database software without any legitimate authorization by the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued the defendant and requested the court to order the defendant to stop infringement immediately and destroy the infringing products, make a public apology, compensate the damages of the plaintiff amounting to RMB 3,000,000, including reasonable legal expenses incurred by the plaintiff.
The court decided that the defendant infringed the plaintiff's copyright to the software and ruled that the defendant must stop the infringement immediately, make a public apology to the plaintiff, compensate the economic losses and reasonable expenses for the litigation incurred by the plaintiff for RMB 200,000 yuan.

O'Melveny & Myers LLP

Beijing Office:
31/F, China World Tower 1
1 Jianguomenwai Avenue
Beijing, 100004
People's Republic of China
Tel. (86-10) 6505-0920
Fax. (86-10) 6505-0921 Shanghai Office:
20/F, Kerry Centre
1515 Nanjing Road West
Shanghai 200040
People's Republic of China
Tel. (86-21) 5298-5600
Fax. (86-21) 5298-5500 Hong Kong Office:
Suite 1905, Tower Two
Lippo Centre
89 Queensway
Central, Hong Kong
Tel. (852) 2523-8266
Fax. (852) 2522-1760

If you wish your name to be removed from this mailing list,
please send a reply email to the sender.

Legal Notice:
This publication is for general information only, and is not a substitute for legal consultation in any particular case. The information presented is not legal advice, and your use of it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please read our Disclaimers/Terms of use for important additional disclosures and for information on terms and conditions of the use of this publication and our website, privacy, and security, as well as our disclaimers and protected rights. Any liability that might arise from your use or reliance on the information in or any links from this publication or our website is expressly disclaimed. The content of any communication you send to us via the Internet or through e-mail may not be considered confidential.

© Copyright 2004 O'Melveny & Myers LLP. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.lawofchina.com http://www.omm.com
http://www.omm-china.com

Patents
Administrative Measures Regarding Patent Agencies
专利代理管理办法
Issuing Authority:	State Administration of Intellectual Property
Date of Issuance:	June 6, 2003
Effective Date:	July 15, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
Patent agencies may take the form of either a partnership or a limited liability company. For a partnership, there should be at least three (3) partners and an investment of RMB50,000, while a minimum of five (5) shareholders and RMB100,000 in capital is required for a limited liability patent agency. Applications for establishment of patent agencies should be filed with provincial level intellectual property bureaus, which in turn forward the applications to the State Administration of Intellectual Property for approval. If a law firm is to apply for a license to engage in the business of a patent agency, it should have at least three (3) attorneys qualified as patent agents.

Patents
Measures Regarding Implementation of Compulsory Patent Licensing
专利实施强制许可办法
Issuing Authority:	State Administration of Intellectual Property
Date of Issuance:	June 13, 2003
Effective Date:	July 15, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
According to these Measures, if a party qualified to exploit an invention or a utility model has made requests on reasonable terms for a license from the patent holder but failed to obtain such license within a reasonable period of time, it may apply for a compulsory patent license ("CPL") pursuant to Article 48 of the Patent Law. If a new patent represents a significant technical advance with economic benefits above and beyond a previous patent, but the implementation of the new patent relies to a great extent on the implementation of such previous patent, both the patent holders of the new and the previous patents may apply for CPL against each other under Article 50 of the Patent Law. In addition, the relevant authorities may grant a CPL to exploit an invention or a utility model in the case of a national emergency if necessitated by public interest in accordance with Article 49 of the Patent Law.

Copyright
Reply of General Office of State Development and Reform Commission on Music Copyright Royalties
国家发展改革委办公厅关于音乐著作权使用费问题的复函
Issuing Authority:	State Development and Reform Commission
Date of Issuance:	November 24, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
In this Reply, the General Office of the State Development and Reform Commission has clarified that music copyright royalties mean any rewards paid by music users to music owners for use of music, and that the Music Copyright Royalty Standards drafted by the Music Copyright Society of China and approved by the General Administration of Press and Publication in 2000 are for reference use only and are not mandatory. Music copyright royalties shall be determined on a case-by-case basis through negotiations between music owners and music users.

Copyright
Opinions of State Copyright Administration Regarding Copyright Protection of Computer Software
国家版权局关于对计算机软件版权保护问题的意见
Issuing Authority:	State Copyright Administration
Date of Issuance:	July 7, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
In reply to inquiries from the Copyright Administration of Zhejiang Province regarding a software infringement case, the SCA confirmed that if a respondent's software is substantially similar to that of the complainant and can not provide the evidence proving the legitimate source of its software, the respondent should bear the liability for copyright infringement. The SCA also explained that the non-infringement defense of limited forms of expression under Article 29 of the Regulations on Computer Software Protection should be based on the prerequisite that the suspected infringing software was independently created and that the alleged infringer has the burden of proving that the relevant forms of expression are limited.

Copyright
Implementing Measures for Administrative Sanctions for Copyright Infringement
著作权行政处罚实施办法
Issuing Authority:	State Copyright Administration
Date of Issuance:	July 24, 2003
Effective Date:	September 1, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
The Measures have been amended in line with the PRC Copyright Law, the Implementing Regulations of the PRC Copyright Law and the Regulations on Computer Software Protection. The measures provide a formal definition of "acts of infringements," clarify the "enforcement authority" of the administrative sanctions, reaffirm the concept of "burden of proof assumed by the suspected infringer" and amend the types of "administrative sanctions." The promulgation of the Measures is intended to enhance the transparency of administrative sanction procedures, and to further strengthen administrative sanctions against copyright infringement.

Copyright
Interpretations on Certain Issues Relating to Application of Law in Adjudication of Cases Disputes concerning Computer Network Copyrights
最高人民法院关于审理涉及计算机网络著作权纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释
Issuing Authority:	Supreme People's Court
Date of Issuance:	January 2, 2004
Effective Date:	January 7, 2004
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
The Interpretations revise previous legislation and specify that network service providers may face civil liability if such providers distribute or provide methods or materials through the internet with clear knowledge that such methods or materials are specifically designed to avoid existing copyright owners' intellectual property rights.

Copyright
Opinions of State Copyright Administration Regarding Licensing of Copyright Business
国家版权局关于对著作权经营许可问题的意见
Issuing Authority:	State Copyright Administration
Date of Issuance:	June 4, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
In a reply to the Copyright Administration of Hainan Province, the State Copyright Administration confirmed that approval from the copyright administrative authority is not required when engaging in the business buying and selling copyrights. However, the agency business for the cross-border transfer or licensing of China-related copyrights is subject to licensing from the State Copyright Administration.

Trademark
Reply of State Administration for Industry and Commerce on Certain Issues Relating to Supervision of Trademarks Printing
国家工商行政管理总局关于商标印制监管有关问题的答复
Issuing Authority:	State Administration for Industry and Commerce
Date of Issuance:	September 18, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
The Reply confirms that printed matters for marks and symbols of both registered trademarks and non-registered trademark are regulated by the Administrative Rules for the Printing Industry. The Reply also states that it shall be deemed an infringement of the right to exclusive use of a registered trademark if a printing enterprise forges or makes, without authorization, marks and symbols of the registered trademark of others, even though the sign of registration of the registered trademark is not displayed.

Domain Names
Announcements on Improving Administration of China's Internet Domain Names
关于加强我国互联网络域名管理工作的公告
Issuing Authority:	Ministry of Information Industry
Date of Issuance:	July 31, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
The Ministry of Information Industry ("MII") has made three Announcements relating to the implementation of the Administrative Measures for China's Internet Domain Names (the "Administrative Measures"). The Announcements require that all entities offering domain name registration services must meet the conditions provided in Administrative Measures and must register with the MII. The Announcements also require service providers to verify domain names on file and to promptly remove any illegally used domain names within thirty days of the promulgation of the Announcements. Additionally, the Announcements call for further improvements to the implementation processes for the Administrative Measures.

Domain Names
Notice on Interpretations of the Law Regarding Qualifications of Domain Name Registration Service Providers
关于从事域名注册服务经营者应具备条件法律适用解释的通告
Issuing Authority:	Ministry of Information Industry
Date of Issuance:	November 20, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
This Notice further interprets Article 12 of the Administrative Measures on Network Domain Names in the People's Republic of China, and sets out detailed requirements for service providers that apply for permission to engage in domain name registration services in China. For example, an applicant must be a legal person that has an ICP license, has at least RMB 1 million registered capital, and employs at least five (5) technicians and ten (10) customer service personnel. Applicants must also meet other requirements to ensure standardized domain name registration and online security.

Domain Names
Notice of Ministry of Information Industry on Publication of Domain Name Registration Service Providers Qualified for Registration of .cn Domain Name
信息产业部关于公布符合从事.cn域名注册服务条件的域名注册服务机构的通告
Issuing Authority:	Ministry of Information Industry
Date of Issuance:	November 24, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
The Notice lists the names and contact information of 13 domain name registration service providers that are qualified to register domain names with .cn and which have been duly recorded with the MII.

Others
Notice on Issuance of Intellectual Property Protection and Management Guidelines in the Construction Survey, Design, and Consulting Industries
关于印发《工程勘察设计咨询业知识产权保护与管理导则》的通知
Issuing Authority:	Ministry of Construction and State Intellectual Property Office
Date of Issuance:	October 22, 2003
Effective Date:	October 22, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
The Guidelines are issued as a reference for the protection and management of intellectual property for enterprises in the construction survey, design and consulting industry. The Guidelines provide information on the types of intellectual property rights involved in the processes of construction survey, construction design and construction consulting; how ownership of these types of intellectual property rights is determined; how an enterprise should protect and manage its intellectual property rights; and what constitutes intellectual property infringement together with a description of the various punishments.

Others
Notice on Issuance of Intellectual Property Administrative Measures for the Transportation Industry (Trial)
关于发布《交通行业知识产权管理办法（试行）》的通知
Issuing Authority:	Ministry of Communications
Date of Issuance:	November 18, 2003
Effective Date:	November 18, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
The Notice states that the Measures apply to all enterprises and organizations in the transportation industry and are intended to strengthen the management, protection and exploitation of intellectual property rights. The Measures state: how ownership of certain intellectual property rights is determined; how an enterprise should protect and manage its intellectual property rights; what duties of transportation administrative agencies are subject to with respect to intellectual property protection and management; what awards should be given for employees who create inventions; and what punishments will result from violation of the Measures.

Others
Notice of Shanghai Municipal Government on Issuance of Opinions on Further Strengthening Work with respect to Intellectual Property in Shanghai
上海市人民政府印发关于进一步加强本市知识产权工作若干意见的通知
Issuing Authority:	Shanghai Municipal Government
Date of Issuance:	July 29, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
Twenty-three measures covering six major aspects are provided for in the Opinions as guidelines for promoting intellectual property ("IP") in Shanghai over the following five years. The six major aspects are: enhancing competitive competence of enterprises by strengthening work with respect to IP; training IP professionals through college education and scientific research institutions; promoting IP awareness in society at large; establishing an IP information service platform; developing the IP service market; and improving IP administrative systems.

Others
Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Customs Protection of Intellectual Property Rights
中华人民共和国知识产权海关保护条例
Issuing Authority:	State Council
Date of Issuance:	December 2, 2003
Effective Date:	March 1, 2004
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
In accordance with the Customs Law of the People's Republic of China, these Regulations grant customs protection for trademark rights, copyright and copyright-related rights and patent rights (collectively referred to herein as “IP rights”) in connection with the importation or exportation of goods. Customs protection involves both registration of IP rights and detainment of goods suspected of infringement. China prohibits any cross-border trade of goods infringing IP rights. In dealing with the registration of protected IP rights, the General Administration of Customs shall decide whether to accept the owner's application within thirty business days. The customs registration period lasts for ten years, and may be extended for another ten years upon application if the concerned IP rights are still effectively protected by relevant laws and regulations. If there are any changes to registered IP rights, the owner of such rights shall report them to the General Administration of Customs within thirty business days. If goods being imported or exported are suspected of infringement, the owner of potentially infringed IP rights may request that local customs authorities detain the concerned goods. Authorities may detain such goods upon receipt of a request, evidentiary documents supporting such requests, and a security deposit for the value of the concerned goods. Authorities shall release detained goods if a court request for enforcement assistance is not received within twenty business days thereafter. If customs authorities suspect goods of infringement upon registered IP rights, they shall inform the owner and detain the concerned goods if the owner submits an application and sufficient security deposit within three business days. Additionally, customs officers shall conduct an investigation within thirty business days to determine whether or not infringement has in fact occurred. By submitting a security deposit equivalent to the value of the detained goods, the consignor or consignee may request that customs authorities release detained goods. If customs authorities accept such a security deposit, determines that there was no infringement, or does not receive a court request for enforcement assistance within fifty business days after detainment of the goods, they shall release the detained goods. After applying for customs protection, the owner of IP rights may request a court injunction to force termination of the infringement or the attachment of detained goods. Customs authorities may confiscate goods determined of infringement. Such confiscated goods may be assigned to public welfare institutions, sold to the owner of infringed-upon IP rights, publicly auctioned after the symbols of infringement are removed, or destroyed if such symbols are irremovable.

Others
Notice on Special Administration of “Pirate Servers” and “Cheat Programs”
关于开展对“私服”、“外挂”专项治理的通知
Issuing Authority:	General Administration of Press and Publication，Ministry of Information Industry, and State Administration for Industry and Commerce
Date of Issuance:	December 18, 2003
Source:	www.law-lib.com/law
Infringement activities with respect to “pirate servers” and “cheat programs” include attacking the technical protection measures of internet games, operating internet games which have been legally published and whose copyright is owned by others, modifying program data , setting up unauthorized server networks or manufacturing counterfeit pre-paid game use cards without permission in order to make a profit. The Notice provides three stages of this special administration: the Publicity Stage (from December 20 to December 31, 2003), the Implementation Stage (from January 1 to February 29, 2004) and the Review and Evaluation Stage (from March 1 to March 15, 2004). During the Implementation Stage, business locations dealing in pirated CD-ROMs and illegal pre-paid cards will be investigated; pirated CD-ROMs, illegal pre-aid cards and related materials will be confiscated; and the enterprises duplicating pirated CD-ROMs and manufacturing illegal pre-paid cards will be subject to punishment.

Discreet v. Shanghai Zhongle
Court:	Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Copyright Infringement
Disposition:	Judgment for Plaintiff, January, 2004
Plaintiff Discreet (Canada), a division of Autodesk (U.S.), discovered that defendant, Shanghai Zhongle Film & Television Co. Ltd. had without authorization installed software to which plaintiff enjoys the copyright for commercial use. Plaintiff sued for copyright infringement, requesting the court to order the defendant to stop the infringement, to delete the software, to pay damages of about RMB3.7 million and to reimburse expenses paid by Discreet. The court decided that the defendant infringed the plaintiff's copyright and ordered an injunction, a public apology and damages of RMB500, 000 against the defendant.

Autodesk v. Union Friend
Court:	Beijing First Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Copyright Infringement
Disposition:	Settled, November 3, 2003
Plaintiff, Autodesk Inc., a US company, is the copyright owner of software "Edit6.0" and "Combustion2.0". It found that defendant, Union Friend Media Investment Co., Ltd, installed more than ten copies of the software into the defendant's computers without authorization. The plaintiff sued the defendant for copyright infringement and requested an injunction, an apology, damages amounting to RMB551,000 and reimbursement of reasonable expenses amounting to RMB50,000 . The defendant argued that it obtained the software via legal channels and that it had stopped using the software immediately after it found that the software was pirated. The parties settled and agreed that the defendant would not use the software without authorization and would make a public apology in a newspaper and reimburse plaintiff's expenses amounting to RMB311, 200.

Xi'an Diamond v. CBA
Court:	Beijing Second Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Copyright Infringement
Disposition:	Judgment for Plaintiff, December 19, 2003
Plaintiff Xi'an Diamond Net Co. Ltd. found that the defendant, China Business Associates Inc.("CBA"), a US company, copied without authorization articles, pictures and website designs etc. from the plaintiff's website and used them on its own websites, www.america-china.com and www.meizhong.com. The plaintiff sued for copyright infringement and requested the court to order the defendant to stop the infringement, make a public apology, and pay damages of RMB300,000. The court decided that the defendant infringed the plaintiff's copyright to the articles, pictures and website designs etc. The court awarded the plaintiff an injunction, a public apology from the defendant on its website and damages of RMB35,000.

Schneider v. Patent Review Committee
Court:	Beijing High People's Court
Cause of Action:	Patent Invalidation
Disposition:	Judgment for Appellee, December 17, 2003
An invention patent of appellant, Schneider Electric Industries SA, a French company, was invalidated before the Patent Review Committee by a Chinese company. The appellant sued for judicial review with the Beijing First Intermediate People's Court but was rejected. The appellant then appealed to the Beijing People's High Court. The appeal court decided that the appellant's invention did not meet the patentability requirement of the Patent Law and should be invalid. The appeal court dismissed the case.

Fischerwerke v. Hangzhou Sitai & Beijing Jianghe
Court:	Beijing Second Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Patent Infringement
Disposition:	Judgment for defendants, December 17, 2003
Plaintiff Fischerwerke Arthur Fischer GmbH & Co. KG, a German company, claimed that the first defendant, Hangzhou Sitai Curtain Wall Equipment Co. Ltd. and the second defendant, Beijing Jianghe Curtain Wall Construction Engineer Co. Ltd., manufactured and/or offered for sale its patented products. The plaintiff filed suit with the court for patent infringement and requested the court to order the first defendant to stop infringement, to make a public apology, to destroy equipment for the production of infringing products, and to pay damages of RMB 1 million. The second defendant should take joint and several obligation. The court decided that the defendants' technology is different from the plaintiff's patented technology and dismissed the case.

Johnson & Johnson v. TRAB
Court:	Beijing First Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Trademark Infringement
Disposition:	Judgment for defendant, December 19, 2003
Plaintiff Johnson & Johnson ("Johnson") registered the trademark "CAREFREE" for sanitary products in China. Zhejiang Kanfuya Healthcare Commodity Co, Ltd., applied to register a trademark "CAREFUL" for the same category of products. The application was preliminarily approved in 1997. Johnson filed opposition to the registration. The Chinese Trademark Office rejected Johnson's opposition. Johnson applied for a review before the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board ("TRAB"). The TRAB rejected Johnson's opposition. Both the Trademark Office and the TRAB decided that the formation, pronunciation, and meaning of these two marks are different and the registration of "CAREFUL" should be allowed. Johnson then sued the TRAB in May, 2003 with Beijing First Intermediate People's Court for judicial review. The court ruled that although the first five letters of these two marks are the same, the pronunciation and the meaning of them are different and if used on the same products would not cause confusion among consumers. The court dismissed the case.

Bonneterie Cévenole SARL v. Monteque Mayjane
Court:	Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Trademark infringement and unfair competition
Disposition:	Judgment for plaintiff, December 29, 2003
Plaintiff Bonneterie Cévenole SARL registered the trademark "Montagut" and its logo in China for clothing products. Defendants Monteque Mayjane (Hong Kong) Fashion Company Limited, Shanghai Meizheng Garment Company Limited and Changshu Haoteba Garment Company Limited used the trademark "Monteque Mayjane" combined with a logo, which was similar to the plaintiff's registered trademark "Montagut" and its logo. Plaintiff sued the defendants for trademark infringement and unfair competition, and requested an injunction and damages of RMB1 million. The court ruled that "Monteque Mayjane" used on the garments was confusingly similar to the plaintiff's trademark "Montagut" and infringed the plaintiff's trademark. The court awarded the plaintiff an injunction and damages of RMB500,000.

Jiang Haixin v. Philips Electronics
Court:	Shanghai Second Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Domain Name Dispute
Disposition:	Judgment for defendant, December 29, 2003
Plaintiff Jiang Haixin, registered "philipscis.com" as a domain name in March 2002. Defendant, Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. ("Philips"), the owner of the trademark "PHILIPS", submitted an application to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ("WIPO AMC") in July 2002 requesting the plaintiff to transfer the domain name in dispute to the defendant. WIPO AMC ruled in September 2002 that the plaintiff should transfer "philipscis.com" to the defendant. Plaintiff sued requesting the court to cancel or refrain from enforcing the award of WIPO AMC and to confirm "philipscis.com" should be owned by the plaintiff. The court decided that the plaintiff's domain name is similar to Philips' trademark and that the plaintiff had registered the domain name in bad faith. The court ruling supported the decision of WIPO AMC.

Guan Dongsheng v. Dow Jones
Court:	Beijing First Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Copyright Infringement
Disposition:	Judgment for Plaintiff, September 22, 2003
Plaintiff Guan Dongsheng wrote a stylized Chinese character "DAO" and give it to the CEO of Dow Jones Co., Ltd. ("Dow Jones"), the first defendant, as a gift. Dow Jones then used the character as its business logo on various media and materials, including, among others, the Internet, newspaper, books, outside advertisements, company brochures and other promotion materials, without the authorization of the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued Dow Jones for copyright infringement and requested the court to order the defendants to stop infringement immediately, make a public apology, compensate the plaintiff RMB 5,000,000, and reimburse cost and expenses of the litigation. The court decided that the plaintiff's stylized Chinese character "DAO" is protected in China as a work of fine art and that Dow Jones has infringed Plaintiff's copyright for using it without authorization. The court order Dow Jones to stop the infringement, make a written apology and pay damages amounted RMB 405,684.

Toyota v. Geely
Court:	Beijing Second Intermediate People's Court
Causes of Action:	Trademark infringement and unfair competition
Disposition:	Case dismissed, November 24, 2003
Plaintiff Toyota Motor Corporation ("Toyota"), registered its logo in China as a trademark. Geely Automobiles Co., Ltd. ("Geely"), a local car manufacturer, uses a logo on its own cars, which plaintiff alleged was similar to its registered trademark. Defendant also stated in its advertising that it used Toyota's engines. Plaintiff sued for trademark infringement and unfair competition, requesting damages of RMB 14 million. The court decided that the two logos were different and would not cause confusion since the entire image of the two logos looked different and ordinary consumers are more likely to pay attention when buying cars. The court also decided that defendant exaggerated in its advertising, but not to the extent that it was misleading consumers. The court therefore ruled that defendant neither infringed plaintiff's registered trademark nor committed unfair competition and that the case should be dismissed.

Warner Music (HK) v. Tianhu.com
Court:	Chengdu Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Copyright infringement
Disposition:	Judgment for plaintiff, September 23, 2003
Plaintiffs Warner Music Hong Kong Ltd., Go East Entertainment Co., Ltd., Universal Music Group Hong Kong Ltd., found that defendant Tianhu.com Operating Information Industry Company provided, without authorization, MP3 downloading of their copyrighted music works. Plaintiffs sued for copyright infringement and requested the court to order the defendant to stop the infringement, to make a public apology and to pay damages of RMB 3.01 million. The court decided that the defendant has infringed the plaintiffs' copyright in spite of the fact that the defendant made a statement in providing the downloading that the downloading is only for test purposes and should be deleted within 24 hours. The court ordered the defendant to stop the infringement immediately, to make a public apology and pay damages of about RMB370,000.

ETS v. New Oriental
Court:	Beijing First Intermediate People's Court
Causes of Action:	Copyright infringement and trademark infringement
Disposition:	Judgment for plaintiff, September 27, 2003
Plaintiff Education Testing Service ("ETS") and Graduate Management Admission Council ("GMAC") had copyright registration in the US for exam papers for the Test of English as a Foreign Language ("TOEFL"), Graduate Record Examination ("GRE") and Graduate Management Admission Test ("GMAT"). They also registered "TOEFL", "GRE" and "GMAT" as trademarks in China. Defendant, New Oriental Education Group, used and published the plaintiff's test papers in its overseas English exam training without authorization. Plaintiff sued the defendant in the Beijing First Intermediate People's Court for copyright and trademark infringement, and requested the court to order the defendant to stop infringement, make a public apology, and compensate the plaintiff's economic losses. The court decided that the defendant infringed the plaintiff's copyright and trademark, and ordered the defendant to stop infringement immediately, make a public apology, and compensate the plaintiff's economic losses amounting to over RMB 10 million.

Universal v. Ke Wen
Court:	Beijing Second Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Copyright infringement
Disposition:	Judgment for plaintiff, December 2003
Defendants Beijing Ke Wen Books Information Technology Co., Ltd. and two other companies, without authorization, reproduced, distributed sound recordings of the plaintiff, Universal Music Group Hong Kong Co., Ltd. The plaintiff sued for copyright infringement requesting an injunction, destruction of infringing products, a public apology and compensation of RMB368,000, covering damages and expenses for investigation and lawsuit. The plaintiff also requested that the three defendant bear joint liability. The court decided in favor of the plaintiff and awarded an injunction, a public apology, damages of RMB120,000 and litigation costs of RMB10,000.

Sybase v. ISD
Court:	Beijing First Intermediate People's Court
Cause of Action:	Copyright infringement
Disposition:	Judgment for claiment, July 10, 2003
Plaintiff Sybase Inc ("Sybase") is the owner of the software Sybase SQL Anywhere 5.5. It discovered that the software made by the defendant, International Software Development (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. ("ISD") linked to the plaintiff's database software without any legitimate authorization by the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued the defendant and requested the court to order the defendant to stop infringement immediately and destroy the infringing products, make a public apology, compensate the damages of the plaintiff amounting to RMB 3,000,000, including reasonable legal expenses incurred by the plaintiff. The court decided that the defendant infringed the plaintiff's copyright to the software and ruled that the defendant must stop the infringement immediately, make a public apology to the plaintiff, compensate the economic losses and reasonable expenses for the litigation incurred by the plaintiff for RMB 200,000 yuan.