China IPR



Beijing Chaoyang District People’s CourtCivil Decision(2014)Chaoyang Civil (IP) First Instance No. 40334Plaintiff: Beijing Sina Internet Information Services Co., Ltd.Defendant: Beijing Tianying Jiuzhou Network Technology Co., Ltd.Third Party: Letv Internet Information & Technology (Beijing) Ltd. Upon acceptance of the Complaint filed by the Plaintiff Beijing Sina Internet Information Services Co., Ltd. (hereafter “Sina”) against the Defendant Beijing Tianying Jiuzhou Network Technology Co., Ltd. (hereafter “Tianying Jiuzhou”) for copyright infringement and unfair competition, Tianying Jiuzhou filed an objection to the jurisdiction of this Court (hereafter “the Court”). The Court made a decision dismissing Tianying Jiuzhou’s objection to the jurisdiction of the Court. Tianying Jiuzhou refused to accept the decision and appealed to Beijing Third Intermediate People’s Court. Beijing Third Intermediate People’s Court dismissed the appeal and maintained the original decision as the final decision on this matter. During the trail of this case, the Court informed Letv Internet Information & Technology (Beijing) Ltd. (hereafter “Letv”) to participate in the trail as third party in accordance with article 56(2) of the Civil Procedure Law. A collegial bench was formed according to the law, and the bench publicly heard this case. Rong Chao and Zhang Zhe, authorized representatives of the Plaintiff Sina, Liu Xinyan, authorized representative of the Defendant Tianying Jiuzhou, and Liu Kai and Cui Xiaolong, authorized representatives of the Third Party Letv, participated in the proceeding. Now the proceeding is concluded.The Plaintiff Sina claimed that: on August 1, 2013, Sina found that on the front page of the Chinese Super League (“CSL”) Channel on (), Tianying Jiuzhou marked and offered live broadcast of the two games on a prominent position of the webpage: = 1 \* GB3 ① Lu Neng VS Fu Li (August 1) = 2 \* GB3 ② Preview — 19:35 Live Streaming Shen Xin VS Shun Tian (August 1). Upon clicking the above mentioned title, they accessed a dedicated webpage for this CSL game with “iFeng Sports News” and “Please tune in to iFeng Sports for live streaming of this game” displayed. On “click to access live streaming studio”, there appeared a logo on the tag of the Internet browser, a title “Live Streaming Cooperation: iFeng Interactive Live Studio” and many commercials on this page. Sina claimed that without authorization, Tianying Jiuzhou set a CSL channel on its website and illegitimately broadcasted CSL live videos, which severely infringed Sina’s exclusive rights in a willful and malicious manner. Therefore, Tianying Jiuzhou’s act of broadcasting the TV signals of live CSL games to the public through information network synchronization had infringed Sina’s copyright in the sporting event program in this case which was created in a way similar to cinematography. In the meantime, Sina held that the sporting events broadcast authorization system of sports event organizers was a legitimate competition order worthy of legal protection. Tianying Jiuzhou’s act disrupted the competition order of this business structure and damaged the business value therein, thus constituted unfair competition. Tianying Jiuzhou clearly had, for the purpose of avoiding regular authorization, illegally, mala fide and unfairly deprived Sina of the interests from exclusive CSL broadcasting, taken away Sina’s economic interests, diverted Sina users’ attention and website traffic, made false and misleading advertisement regarding the source of the video, and broadcasted CSL games at its portal website under the name of cooperation which in fact violated business ethics. Therefore, under copyright law, anti-unfair competition law and relevant laws and regulations, Sina prayed the Court to decide that Tianying Jiuzhou shall cease infringing Sina’s exclusive right of broadcasting the CSL games, immediately cease disrupting the broadcasting right of sporting events and the legitimate and fair competition order and business structure of the authorization system, immediately cease, for obvious purpose of avoiding regular authorization, broadcasting live CSL games on the website of Tianying Jiuzhou under the name of the so-called “Sports Live Streaming Studio”, immediately cease false and misleading advertisement regarding the source of the video, pay an amount of RMB 10 million in damages, and make an announcement on the home page of and China Television Paper in order to eliminate the adverse effects of the infringement and unfair competition activities.The Defendant claimed that: (1) the claims made by Sina were unclear; (2) the Complaint was groundless, as soccer games were not the subject matter of copyright law, and the right to the sporting events did not naturally result in the right to the sporting events programs; (3) Sina lacked the capacity to sue, as it was not authorized by the author and the authorization obtained by Sina had epidemic flaw; (4) the Defendant sued by Sina was incorrect; (5) the amount of damages lacked support. The Third Party Letv stated that, Letv had the right to broadcast the CSL games in this case, Letv cooperated with Tianying Jiuzhou regarding the domain name (ifeng.), but did not enter into any cooperation regarding the CSL games, the broadcasted games were not form Letv’s website. Therefore, Letv did not take part in joint infringement activity.The Court found the following facts to be true:FIFA Statues (July 2012) stipulated under the “Members’ Independence” clause that “members have the obligation to manage their affairs independently and ensure that their own affairs are not influenced by any third parties.” And under the chapter “Rights in Competitions and Events”, it is stipulated that “FIFA, its Members and the Confederations are the original owners of all ofthe rights emanating from competitions and other events coming under their respective jurisdiction, without any restrictions as to content, time, place and law. These rights include, among others, every kind of financial rights, audiovisual and radio recording, reproduction and broadcasting rights, multimedia rights, marketing and promotional rights and incorporeal rights such as emblems and rights arising under copyright law.” The Statues was notarized by Beijing Fangzheng Notary Office in the notarial certificates (2014) Fangzheng Nei Jing Zheng Zi No. 12458 and 12461.The Chinese Football Association (CFA) Statues issued on January 19, 2005 provided that, CFA was the only member representing China in FIFA and Asian Football Confederation (AFC); and in the chapter of “Principles on Asset Management and Utilization”, it was clearly stipulated that “the major source of funding of CFA” included “income from sales of broadcasting rights”, “sports business related income”, “income from license, assignment of incorporeal asset and other derivative income”, and “other legitimate income”; in the chapter of “Sporting Events and Competition Rules”, under “Rights in Sporting Events” it was clearly stipulated that “CFA is the management institution of China football games, the original owner of all rights emanating from competitions and other events under CFA’s jurisdiction. Such rights include financial rights, audiovisual and radio recording, reproduction and broadcasting rights, multimedia rights, marketing and promotional rights and incorporeal rights such as emblems and rights arising under copyright law.” “CFA may utilize its rights in the sporting events in light of the need and in the following manners: utilize the rights exclusively, or jointly with a third party, or entirely through a third party.” Under the “Competition Management” clause, it was stipulated that “official competitions of all levels in China” “are under direct management of CFA”. The CFA Statues was valid till 2013. The Statues was notarized by Beijing Fangzheng Notary Office in the notarial certificates (2014) Fangzheng Nei Jing Zheng Zi No. 12460.On March 8, 2006, CFA issued an authorization letter, in which it was stated that: “according to FIFA Statues and CFA Statues, CFA is the original owner of all rights emanating from CSL. Such rights include financial rights, audiovisual and radio recording, reproduction and broadcasting rights, multimedia rights, marketing and promotional rights and incorporeal rights such as emblems and rights arising under copyright law. In order to promote CSL, CFA authorizes Chinese Super League Co., Ltd. (“CSL Co., Ltd.”) to develop and manage CSL television, broadcast, Internet and various multimedia rights, CSL naming rights, advertising rights on the field, special item supplying right, incorporeal rights such as CSL image design, information resources, brand resources etc., and other rights or resources emanating from CSL (including but not limited to resources emanating from assets of the competing clubs). CSL Co., Ltd. may engage in market development and promotion of the above mentioned resources on a global scale, it has right to contact, negotiate and sign relevant agreements etc., and may delegate the agency within the scope of authorization after CFA keeps a record of such delegation. This authorization is the sole authorization from CFA with regard to development and management of CSL resources, and is valid for ten years (from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2015)”.On March 7, 2012, CSL Co., Ltd. and Sina entered into a contract. According to the contract, Sina had exclusive right to broadcast the CSL games on portal websites, including but not limited to live broadcast, recorded broadcast, broadcast on demand and postponed broadcast; and the above mentioned portal websites included but not limited to Tencent (; ), Sohu (), Netease (; ), iFeng (), TOM (), People’s Daily (), Xinhua Net (), CSL Co., Ltd. shall not cooperate with these portal websites in any form; the contract was valid from March 1, 2012 to March 1, 2014; and to avoid any confusion, the portal websites stipulated in this contract that were competitors of Sina included but not limited to Tencent, Sohu, Netease, iFeng, TOM, People’s Daily, and Xinhua Net etc.; CSL Co., Ltd. shall insure that the above mentioned competitors of Sina do not, in any form, broadcast live or recorded CSL games by pirating television signals, offer broadcast on demand, or offer links to such broadcast, publicly make false advertisement on their rights to broadcast live or on demand CSL games. On December 24, 2013, CSL Co., Ltd. issued an authorization letter to Sina. In this letter, it was stated that CSL Co., Ltd. was authorized by CFA to develop and manage CSL media assets; CSL Co., Ltd. authorized Sina, during the term of the contract, the exclusive right to broadcast, transmit and play the CSL games and related videos on portal websites, including but not limited to live broadcast, recorded broadcast, broadcast on demand and postponed broadcast. The above mentioned portal websites, i.e. website that CSL Co., Ltd. cannot cooperate with, included but not limited to Tencent (; ), Sohu (), Netease (; ), iFeng (), TOM (), People’s Daily (), Xinhua Net () etc. The authorization was valid until March 1, 2014, the authorization would automatically terminate upon expiry of such date. As the sole agent authorized by CFA for its commercial assets, CSL Co., Ltd. hereby certified that Sina had the right to take all legal measures to stop any third party from illegal use of the above mentioned videos, including litigation. This authorization was valid for two years (March 1, 2012 to March 1, 2014), and was already filed with CFA. For the CSL games Lu Neng VS Fu Li, Shen Xin VS Shun Tian on August 1, 2013, Sina, as authorized by the above mentioned contract, had the exclusive right to broadcast, transmit, and play the two CSL games and related videos on its portal website, including but not limited to live broadcast, recorded broadcast, broadcast on demand and postponed broadcast.Tianying Jiuzhou as the owner of the website , is responsible for operation of this website. On the webpage of , when click on the column “CSL”, one could access iFeng sports page, then click on “preview”, one could access “iFeng Sports > Chinese Football > CSL > Main text”, there was a line appearing on the webpage which read “Click here to access Live streaming Studio” along with advertisement contents. Click on “Click here to access Live Streaming Studio”, one could see the “Sports Live Streaming Studio” at the address “ifeng.sports.”. The tag of the webpage read “Live Streaming Cooperation: iFeng Interactive Live Studio”. On the preview page of the sports videos, there were announcements about the two games, which read “Please tune in to iFeng Sports for live streaming of this game”. Live streaming of the two games “Shandong Lu Neng VS Guangdong Fu Li” and “Shenxin VS Shuntian” on August 1, 2013 were accessible on the “Sports Live Streaming Studio”. On the webpage, there appeared the address ifeng.sports. with logos of BTV and CCTV 5; at the same time, two return links were displayed on the top of the webpage, i.e. “iFeng Sports” and “Letv Sports”. The videos of the two games all included pictures of replay, zoom, football pitch, stand, the whole pitch and part of the pitch, and commentary of the entire games. The above mentioned process was conducted on a cleaned computer of the Shanghai Minxing Notary Office on August 1, 2013, and notarized in the notarial certificate (2013) Hu Min Zheng Jing Zi No. 1903.Letv is the operator of the video website () which broadcasted the CSL games on August 1, 2015. In this regard, Letv argued that the pictures of the CSL games broadcasted on its website were different from those broadcasted by , but Letv failed to provide any evidence. Letv’s rights in the CSL games came from:On April 19, 2013, Letv (Party A) signed a Licensing Agreement with PPLive Corporation Limited (Party B) and Letv Information Technology (HK) Limited (Party C) on 2013-2014 Season CSL Games content. According to the agreement, Party B had the exclusive information network broadcasting rights (which can be delegated) to broadcast 2013-2014 Season CSL games within mainland China (excluding Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan), including live broadcast, postponed broadcast, broadcast on demand and producing game highlights; Party A could broadcast the above mentioned games only on its own website (only at ), or on personal computers (including PC webpages, PC user end, excluding handhold mobile device, PAD, mobile phone or TV etc.); Part A shall not, without authorization from Party B, cooperate with or authorize any third party to use the authorized games, either through providing links or establishing cooperation platform etc.On March 15, 2012, Ti Ao Dong Li (Beijing) Sports Broadcast Limited (hereafter “Ti Ao Dong Li”) issued an authorization letter to PPLive Corporation Limited (hereafter “PPLive”), authorizing PPLive exclusive information network broadcasting rights and distribution right, including live broadcast, broadcast on demand, postponed broadcast and producing game highlights.CSL Co., Ltd. (Party A) signed an agreement with Ti Ao Dong Li (Party B). Both parties agreed that, from February 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014, Party A, as authorized by CFA, enjoyed financial rights such as CSL TV broadcast copyright, was responsible for operating and managing CSL companies with commercial assets; Party B hoped to obtain CSL TV broadcasting right, TV products right, Internet broadcasting right, cellphone application development right, TV broadcasting right outside Mainland China, and Internet broadcasting right outside Mainland China. Regarding Internet broadcasting right, the agreement stipulated that, Party B had the right to authorize Internet broadcasting exclusively to a third party website or Internet institution, but shall not authorize such rights to any portal websites; Party A retained the right to authorize any portal websites to broadcast CSL games online; if any signal transmission fee was incurred to the authorized portal website operators, the authorized party shall discuss with Party B. On March 15, 2012, CSL Co., Ltd. issued an authorization letter in which it was stated that CSL Co., Ltd. cooperated with Ti Ao Dong Li on CSL games radio and TV broadcasting at local TV stations, non-portal websites Internet broadcasting copyright, cellphone application software, overseas TV broadcasting and overseas Internet broadcasting development, and this agreement was valid till December 31, 2014.Regarding the broadcasting of the CSL games at ifeng.sports., Letv and Tianying Jiuzhou acknowledged that they created this domain name for purpose of cooperation. During the cooperation period, Letv pushed videos on webpages at this domain name, but the cooperation was terminated afterwards. With regard to the source of the CSL games broadcasted, Tianying Jiuzhou claimed that they were redirected from , which Letv denied but failed to provide any evidence. Both parties agreed that the URL for broadcasting the CSL games was not functional anymore.Sina claimed that, servers were needed for broadcasting the games, resulting in loss on IDC broadband cost, rack expense, hardware depreciation expense, but as all the data on the server were mixed, they were not able to tell which exactly were related to the CSL games; and they also suffered loss of the advertisement fees. But Sina did not provide relevant evidence for such claims.On July 31, 2014, CSL Co., Ltd. released a Statement. In the Statement, it was pointed out that as the sole authorized agent for CFA’s financial assets, CSL Co., Ltd. certified that Sina was the exclusive owner of the CSL games broadcasting rights on portal websites (from March 1, 2012 to March 1, 2014), and CSL Co., Ltd. had never by itself or through its subagent authorize or license () or its related websites to broadcast the CSL games, including live broadcast, recorded broadcast, broadcast on demand and postponed broadcast, had never authorized any party to cooperate with any third party to broadcast CSL games in the form of cooperative broadcasting or broadcasting Cooperative Live Steaming Studio, Live Steaming Platform at any domain name owned or not owned by such party. The unfair competition activities of and its cooperative companies had severely damaged the established order of sports broadcasting and copyright license market, unfairly stole the economic benefits of the licensed companies, severely damaged the market competition order and harmed the development of a healthy order of the sports market.The above mentioned facts were supported by relevant statues, notarial certificates, authorization letters, statements, record of the hearing and record of investigation etc.In the opinion of the Court, CFA is the rightful holder of all rights in various football games according to FIFA Statues and CFA Statues; its rights include all financial rights, audiovisual and radio recording, reproduction and broadcasting rights, multimedia rights, marketing and promotional rights and incorporeal rights such as emblems and rights arising under copyright law; in the meantime, it has the right to execute its right through cooperation with third parties and exclusive license to third parties. Under such circumstances, according to the authorization letter issued by CFA on March 8, 2006, it can be confirmed that CSL Co., Ltd is the authorized agent of CFA to develop and manage CSL television, broadcast, Internet and various multimedia copyrights, may engage in market development and promotion of the above mentioned assets on a global scale, has rights to contact, negotiate and sign relevant agreements etc., and may delegate the agency within the scope of authorization after CFA keeps a record of such delegation, and this authorization is the sole authorization from CFA regarding CSL asset development and management.On the basis of the above mentioned statues and authorization, it can be confirmed that, the authorization letter issued by CSL Co., Ltd. to Sina on December 24, 2013 is valid and effective. Thus, Sina has, within the contract period, the exclusive right to broadcast, transmit, and play CSL games and all related videos on its portal websites, including but not limited to live broadcast, recorded broadcast, broadcast on demand and postponed broadcast; and Sina has rights to take all legal measures necessary, including litigation, to stop any third party from infringing the above mentioned rights and obtaining damages.From the above mentioned statues and authorization, it is clear that broadcasting of the CSL games is within the scope of the relevant rights; and also Sina has broadcasting rights of the CSL games. Though logos of BTV and CCTV appeared on the webpage where the CSL games were broadcasted, Sina’s broadcasting rights of the CSL games obtained through the above mentioned verification and authorization procedure cannot be denied; at the same time, according to the agreement between CSL Co., Ltd. and Ti Ao Dong Li, CSL Co., Ltd. has separately authorized portal websites broadcasting right, and TV broadcasting right, TV products rights etc. Therefore, the Court does not accept Tianying Jiuzhou’s claim that Sina is not authorized or the authorization obtained by Sina has epidemic flaw. From the address ifeng.sports. at which the CSL games were broadcasted, and the access status displayed on the webpage on which the CSL games were broadcasted, it is clear that the CSL games were broadcasted at a secondary domain name of . Generally, from the technical perspective, owner of a domain name can control the content on its secondary domain name, i.e. Letv has control over the broadcasted CSL games. Considering Tianying Jiuzhou used to cooperate with Letv, Letv used to push related videos to , and the title “Live Streaming Cooperation: iFeng Interactive Live Studio” was displayed on the webpage, and also considering there were two return links on the webpage broadcasting the CSL games “Letv Sports” and “iFeng Sports”, it cannot be concluded that such webpage returns to a single main webpage (address). Considering the website address at which the CSL games were broadcasted is not functional, the source server cannot be identified through analyzing the domain name at which the CSL games were broadcasted, and further considering Letv cannot provide any evidence to prove that the CSL games broadcasted by Letv were different from those broadcasted on , the Court does not accept Letv’s claim that it is unaware of iFeng’s broadcasting of the CSL games, and the Court holds that the information source of the CSL games broadcasted on is decided and provided by Letv.From the chain of Letv’s acquirement of the right to broadcast the CSL games, it is clear that: (1) the authorized scope of Ti Ao Dong Li with regard to the CSL games is limited to radio and TV broadcasting at local TV stations, non-portal websites Internet broadcasting copyright, cellphone application software, overseas TV broadcasting and overseas Internet broadcasting development, which is to say is outside of the above mentioned scope; (2) Letv shall broadcast the authorized games only on its own website, and shall not cooperate with or authorize any third party to use the authorized games through providing links or establishing cooperation platforms. The current evidence does not show that Letv is not aware of iFeng’s broadcasting of the CSL games.Therefore, it is clear that the activity of Tianying Jiuzhou providing links to the games is not merely Internet service activity, but the activity is broadcasting the CSL games, by way of providing links and cooperation with Letv, to Internet users without authorization, which is broadcasting the CSL games. According to the Torts Liability Law, where the joint and several liability shall be borne by the tortfeasors according to law, the infringed shall be entitled to claim partial or all of the tortfeasors to bear the liability. From perspective of the source of the authorization, “portal website” is not a legal concept, and the right to establish a portal website belongs to the CSL games proprietor CSL Co., Ltd., i.e. CSL Co., Ltd. agreed on the scope of portal websites in its contract. From the authorization letter of CSL Co., Ltd. to Sina, and belong to the same type of websites, i.e. portal websites; iFeng does not have right to broadcast the CSL games. Thus the broadcasting activity of iFeng, has infringed on the broadcasting right of Sina, and Sina has the right to claim Tianying Jiuzhou to bear the infringement liability and cease the infringement activity. Sina proposed in this case that, pictures of the CSL games shall be protected under Copyright Law. According to copyright law, only intellectual achievements that are original and can be reproduced in any tangible medium are works protected under the Chinese copyright law. Originality is the key for the Court to decide whether pictures of the CSL games constitute work. Originality means independent creation without imitating or plagiarizing others’ works.From an overall perspective of sporting events broadcasting and production, sporting events’ broadcasting and production are, by setting a few, tens of or dozens of fixed or unfixed recording equipment, shoot, record, and produce final pictures seen by users and audience, but fixed camera equipment does not mean fixed pictures. The pictures seen by the audience are not exactly the same or exactly simultaneous with the sporting event on site. This shows that the production procedure of sporting events broadcasts, involves not only recording of the sporting event, but also replays, close-up shots of the game or players, pictures of the football pitch and the stand, players and the audience, the whole football pitch and part of the football pitch, and also commentary. The formation of the above mentioned pictures, is the result of the director’s selection and arrangement of multiple shots taken by multiple recording equipment. This whole procedure, through different means such as different placement of recording equipment, different selection of pictures, arrangements and cuts, will produce different final pictures, or say, different sporting events directors will produce different sporting events pictures. Thus, although the law does not specify the standard of originality, it should be agreed that, through selection and arrangement of the recording cameras for sporting events, new pictures are created, which is undoubtedly a creative endeavor.? And the originality is reflected in the fact that through different selection and production, different pictures will be created.? That is to say, pictures generated through recording of sporting events, meet the requirement of originality under Chinese copyright law, and shall be regarded as work.? With regard to the pictures of the CSL games in this case, they meet the originality requirement mentioned above, i.e., through shooting and producing, pictures are created, they generate visual responses and effects to audiences in audiovisual forms, thus constituting work.To sum up, Letv and Tianying Jiuzhou have jointly broadcasted the CSL games, and have infringed on Sina’s copyright in pictures of the CLS games. With regard to the broadcasting activity of the CSL games, though it was conducted on the information network, as it was not accessible in an interactive way at any given place and time online, such activity is not regulated by the Regulation on Protection of the Right to Network Dissemination of Information, but regulated by the Copyright Law and the rights being infringed upon fell in the category of “other rights which shall be enjoyed by the copyright owners”. Therefore, the Court upholds Sina’s claim that Tianying Jiuzhou has infringed on its copyright and Sina’s claim that Tianying Jiuzhou shall cease infringement, pay damages and eliminate effects.In this case, Sina also filed an unfair competition suit against Tianying Jiuzhou. In this regard, the Court holds that the sporting events broadcast authorization system of sports event organizers shall be protected under law, and sports event organizers are the proprietors of such rights. Sina claimed that Tianying Jiuzhou unfairly deprived it of its interests in broadcasting the games, diverted Sina users’ attention and website traffic, and made false and misleading advertisement regarding the source of the video services. These facts are consequences of the above mentioned infringement activities, thus the same facts, shall not be regulated by two different laws. Sina, an authorized party to broadcast the sporting events, has obtained remedies under Copyright Law for its infringed rights. In other words, the broadcasting activity has been regulated under Copyright Law, thus it is not necessary to be regulated again under Anti-unfair Competition Law. Therefore, the Court does not accept Sina’s claim regarding the unfair competition claim.Sina claims an amount of RMB 10 million in damages. The Court holds that, the economic loss of Sina from depreciation expenses of servers, broadband, racks and hardware in broadcasting the games, including advertisement costs, are all reasonable. But such loss is calculated on the basis of the 2013 Season, which is quite different form the two CSL games in this case. The Court will calculate the damages on the basis of the two CSL games in this case.According to the law, filing a complaint shall meet certain requirements, which include specific defendant(s), concrete claims, facts and reasons. From the above analysis, it is clear that Sina has relevant rights, and there is evidence to prove that Tianying Jiuzhou exercised Sina’s rights in broadcasting the games. Sina provided a specific defendant Tianying Jiuzhou at a specific address, and presented relevant facts to prove the legal relationship between the parties; Sina further submitted claims and claims against Tianying Jiuzhou. Therefore, Sina’s complaint has met requirements under the law. The Court rejects Tianying Jiuzhou’s claims that Sina lacks the capacity to sue, the claims are unclear or the Defendant is incorrect. According to article 13 of PRC Torts Liability Law, article 10(17), article 47(11) and article 49 of PRC Copyright Law, article 2 of Regulation on the Implementation of PRC Copyright Law, and article 4 of Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in Hearing Civil Dispute Cases Involving Infringement of the Right of Dissemination on Information Network, the Court decides:the Defendant Tianying Jiuzhou shall cease broadcasting the CSL games that took place between March 1, 2012 and March 1, 2014;The Defendant Tianying Jiuzhou shall make an announcement on the front page of its website () for 7 consecutive days within 30 days after this decision takes effect, so as to eliminate adverse effects caused to the Plaintiff Sina (the content of the announcement shall be reviewed by the Court within 7 days after this decision takes effect, and if it is not implemented within the timeline, the Court will publish the major content of this decision on relevant media, and the Defendant Tianying Jiuzhou shall bear any such costs);The Defendant shall pay an amount of RMB 500,000 in damages to the Plaintiff Sina within 10 days after this decision takes effect;Reject any other claims of Sina.If the Defendant fails to carry out the duty to pay relevant fees within the specified timeline in this decision, the Defendant shall, in accordance with article 253 of the PRC Civil Procedure Law, pay double interest for the debt for the period of deferred performance.For the court acceptance fee of RMB 81,800, the Plaintiff shall bear RMB44,990 (already paid), and the Defendant shall bear RMB 36,810 (payable within 7 days after this decision takes effect).The Parties, if unsatisfied with this decision, may file a petition for appeal to the Court within 15 days after receipt of this decision, along with sufficient copies of the petition for appeal, and appeal to Beijing Intellectual Property Court.Presiding Judge: Lin ZiyinJudge: Li ZizhuActing Judge: Peng XinqiaoJune 30, 2015Court Clerk: Tan Yawen ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download