Editor's Note
北大法律信息网推出“法宝双语案例”栏目。本栏目选取近期热门司法案例进行双语发布，每两周一期，欢迎关注！感谢新老朋友对北大法律信息网的大力支持，我们会持续为大家提供更好的法律信息服务。本周推送第七期！
一、上海晨光文具股份有限公司诉得力集团有限公司等侵害外观设计专利权纠纷案Shanghai M&G Chenguang Stationery Inc. v. Deli Group Co., Ltd. et al. (case of dispute over infringement upon a design patent)关于外观设计近似的判断，应遵循“整体观察，综合判断”的原则。在具体案件中，既应考察被诉侵权设计与授权外观设计的相似性，也考察其差异性；应分别从被诉侵权产品与授权外观设计的相同设计特征和区别设计特征出发，就其对整体视觉效果的影响分别进行客观分析，避免主观因素的影响。未付出创造性劳动，通过在授权外观设计的基础上，改变或添加不具有实质性区别的设计元素以及图案和色彩，实施外观设计专利的，构成对外观设计专利权的侵犯。The principle of "overall observation and comprehensive judgment" should be followed for the judgment of design approximation. In a specific case, both the similarity and the difference between an alleged infringing design and a patented design should be examined. The objective analysis of the overall visual effects should be conducted respectively from the perspectives of identical and different design features between the alleged infringing design and the patented design to avoid the influence of subjective factors. Where any person implements the design patent without any creative effort made in it, simply by changing or adding design elements as well as patterns and colors without substantial differences on the basis of the patented design, such act constitutes an infringement on the design patent right.[CLI Code] CLI.C.67961293(EN)
二、北京爱奇艺科技有限公司诉深圳聚网视科技有限公司其他不正当竞争纠纷案Beijing iQIYI Technology Co., Ltd. v. Shenzhen VST Technology Co., Ltd. (Case about disputes over other unfair competition)行为人开发并运营相关软件，实现无需观看片前广告即可直接观看其他网络视频平台视频的功能，该行为违背了诚实信用原则，损害了其他网络视频平台依托其正当商业模式获取商业利益的合法权益，构成不正当竞争。The actor develops and operates the relevant software, and realizes functions of directly playing videos of other online video platform without playing the former advertising. This act has violated the principle of good faith and impaired the lawful rights and interests of other online video platforms that seek business profits by depending on their justifiable business models. Therefore, it constitutes unfair competition.[CLI Code] CLI.C.8709498(EN)
三、上海美术电影制片厂与电子工业出版社、曲建方著作权权属、侵权纠纷案Shanghai Animation Film Studio v. Publishing House of Electronics Industry and Qu Jianfang (case of dispute over the ownership of copyright and infringement)特定历史时期职务作品的著作权归属不宜直接适用现行《著作权法》对职务作品的权利归属所确定的判断标准进行判定。本案上海美术电影制片厂(以下简称美影厂)和曲建方通过诉讼主张涉案角色造型作品著作权的归属是在涉案作品创作完成的三十余年后，期间，美影厂与曲建方各自使用涉案作品的共存状态是客观存在的事实，且双方都为涉案角色造型的社会影响力提高、品牌价值力提升等方面做出了贡献。在此种情况下若将涉案作品的著作权财产权归属一方当事人单独享有，显然会导致权利失衡，也有违公平原则。It is not appropriate to make a determination on the ownership of the service work created in a specific historical period by directly applying the judgment criteria of the ownership of the work created in the course of employment as prescribed in the current Copyright Law. In this case, when the Shanghai Animation Film Studio and Qu Jianfang make a claim for the ownership of copyright of the character modeling at issue by litigation, 30 years have passed since the completion of the work involved in this case, and during this period, it is an objective fact that their respective use of the work coexists, and both sides have contributed to the improvement of social influence and brand value of the character modeling. Under such circumstances, if the property right in the work is attributed to one party, it not only leads to the imbalance of rights, but also violates the fairness principle.[CLI Code] CLI.C.62476867(EN)更多精彩，请点击菜单栏“法宝盘点-法宝原创-双语新闻”：
客服 | 法小宝
微信 | pkulaw-kefu
微博 | @北大法宝
点击相应图片识别二维码
获取更多信息