互联网知识产权案例要旨汇编 | 法宝双语案例

【来源】北大法宝英文译本库

【责任编辑】Mani

【声明】本文由北大法宝编写，转载请注明来源。

互联网知识产权案例要旨汇编Case Summaries of Intellectual Property Cases Involving Internet

一、北京金色倾城科技发展有限公司与（德国）维拉股份公司（WELLAAKTIENGESELLSCHAFT）计算机网络域名纠纷上诉案

Beijing Jinse Qingcheng Technology Development Co., Ltd. v. Wella Aktiengesellschaft (appeal of dispute over domain name)

【核心术语】网络域名侵权；注册商标；恶意模仿

[Key Terms] internet domain name infringement; registered trademark; malicious copying

【争议焦点】当事人通过模仿他人的注册商标进行网络域名登记的行为是否构成侵权行为？

[Disputed Issues]  Where a person registers an internet domain name through the malicious copying of the registered trademark of others, has infringement been committed?

【案例要旨】网络域名的主要功能在于标识网站所有者，区别不同的网站提供商；商标的作用是标识商品或者服务的来源。因此，网络域名与商标在性质和作用上具有相似性，而在法律保护上存在互斥性和竞争性，即网络域名登记不能侵犯已有的注册商标权，反之亦然。《最高人民法院关于审理涉及计算机网络域名民事纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第四条第（二）项规定，域名或其主要部分构成对他人驰名商标的复制、模仿、翻译或音译；或者与他人的注册商标、域名等相同或近似，足以造成相关公众的误认的，构成侵权行为或者不正当竞争行为。因此，当事人通过模仿他人的注册商标进行网络域名登记的，如果造成相关公众误认的后果，则该行为构成侵权行为，其应当承担侵权责任。

[Case Summary] The main function of an internet domain name is to indicate a website's owner and distinguish between different website providers. The function of a trademark is to indicate the source of products or services. Therefore, internet domain names and trademarks are similar in their nature and function but, in terms of legal protection, they are mutually exclusive and competitive. That is to say, an internet domain name is not to infringe upon the rights of a registered trademark, and vice versa. Under Article 4, Paragraph 2 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Application of Laws in the Trial of Civil Disputes over Domain Names of Computer Networks, where a domain name or the main parts of a domain name have duplicated, imitated, translated or transliterated the well-known trademark of others; or where a domain name is the same as or similar to the registered trademark of others, so that the public may mistake it for the registered trademark, it is infringement or unfair competition. Therefore, where a person registers an internet domain name through the malicious copying of the registered trademark of others, if it has the effect of causing mistake by the relevant public, then the act constitutes infringement, and liability for infringement is to be assumed.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.829362

[CLI Code] CLI.C.829362(EN)

二、乐视网信息技术（北京）股份有限公司诉广州珠江数码集团有限公司侵害作品信息网络传播权纠纷案——三网融合下广播权与信息网络传播权的认定

LeTV Information Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd. v. Guangzhou Zhujiang Digital Media Group Co., Ltd. (dispute over infringement of right to network dissemination of information)

【核心术语】广播权；实施主体；行为类型；行为对象；信息网络传播权

[Key Terms] broadcast right; implementing entity; type of act; object of an act; right to network dissemination of information

【争议焦点】具有广播电台、电视台性质的主体，利用自己的有线电视网络设备转播合法获取的卫星节目，并给用户提供点播、观看的行为，是否侵犯他人享有的信息网络传播权？

[Disputed Issues]  Where an entity of the same nature as a radio station or a TV station relays legally acquired satellite programs using its own cable TV network equipment and allows its users to order and watch the programs, do such acts infringe upon any other entity's right to network dissemination of information?

【案例要旨】广播权是指以无线方式公开广播或者传播作品，以有线传播或者转播的方式向公众传播广播的作品，以及通过扩音器或者其他传送符号、声音、图像的类似工具向公众传播广播的作品的权利。广播权不同于信息网络传播权，其实施主体具有特殊性，一般是广播电台或电视台；其行为有三种表现形式，即无线广播作品的行为、有线传播或转播被无线广播的作品的行为、以扩音器等工具传播被无线广播的作品的行为；另外，广播权提供作品的对象仅限于其已有用户。而具有广播电台、电视台性质的主体，利用自己的有线电视网络设备转播合法获取的卫星节目，并给用户提供点播、观看的行为，完全符合广播权的上述特征，系传统广播电视业务的发展和延伸，故其行为性质应视为广播行为，并不构成对他人信息网络传播权的侵害。

[Case Summary] The term “broadcast right” refers to the right to publicly broadcast or disseminate works by wireless means, to disseminate broadcast works to the public by wired dissemination or relaying, and to disseminate broadcast works to the public by audio amplifier or other similar instruments for transmission of signs, sounds or images. The broadcast right differs from the right to network dissemination of information because of the uniqueness of the implementing entities allowed to enjoy such a right are limited to radio stations or TV stations. The broadcast right can be exercised in three ways: that is, broadcasting works wirelessly, dissemination in a wired manner, or relaying works that are being broadcast wirelessly and disseminating works that are being broadcast wirelessly by audio amplifier or other similar instruments. Additionally, works disseminated by exercising the broadcast right are only provided to existing users. Where an entity of the same nature as a radio station or a TV station relays legally acquired satellite programs using its own cable TV network equipment and allow its users to order and watch the programs, such acts fully satisfy the aforementioned attributes of the broadcast right and is the extension of the radio and TV business. Thus, such acts shall be deemed as acts of broadcasting and do not constitute an infringement of any other entity's right to network dissemination of information.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.4565013

[CLI Code] CLI.C.4565013(EN)

三、嵌入式软件著作权侵权案（北京合众思壮科技股份有限公司与微软公司侵害计算机软件著作权纠纷上诉案）

Beijing UniStrong v. Microsoft (appellate case of dispute over computer software copyright infringement)

【核心术语】嵌入式软件；复制品；合法来源

[Key Terms] embedded software; copy; lawful source

【争议焦点】使用嵌入式软件的商品销售者，对其所使用的复制品具有合法来源负有举证责任。

[Disputed Issues] The seller of commodities using embedded software bears the burden to prove the lawful source of the copies in use.

【案例要旨】软件复制品的出版者、制作者的合法使用行为的证明有两种方式，一种是证明软件的出版、制作行为获得了合法的授权，另一种是证明软件的复制品有合法来源。正版标签是常见的复制品合法来源的证据，其使用属于软件行业的惯例，一般由软件著作权人提供，用以证明软件的复制行为得到了软件著作权人的授权或者许可。除正版标签外，识别码、激活码等数字口令也是软件著作权人通过技术手段控制软件使用，从而证明软件复制行为得到合法授权或者许可的证据。

[Case Summary] There are two ways to prove that the use of the software by the publisher or producer of the software copies is lawful. The first way is to prove that the software is published or produced with the lawful authorization, and the other way is to prove that the software copies are from legal sources. The genuine label is the common proof of the legal source of copies and its use is a convention in the software industry. It is usually provided by the software copyright owner to prove that the software is copied with the authorization or permission from the software copyright owner. In addition to the genuine label, such numerical passwords as identification codes and activation codes are the proof to the effect that the software copyright owner controls the use of software by the technical means and thus the software is copied with lawful authorization or permission.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.2914383 

[CLI Code] CLI.C.2914383(EN)

▼往期精彩回顾▼

—更多内容—

欢迎扫码获取法宝介绍和试用

OUR VISION

爱法律，有未来

为法律人打造美好的工作体验

北大法律信息网	北大法宝

北大法宝学堂

法宝智能