Because the People's Education Press's "Textbook" catalog was used in the teaching materials, and the relevant texts and other contents were reproduced, Jiangsu People's Publishing House was sued by the People's Education Press and claimed more than 100,000 yuan. After hearing the case, the two courts in Nanjing believed that the use of the "Textbook" catalog was within a reasonable scope, but the use of relevant texts and other contents was an infringement, so they ruled that Jiangsu People's Publishing House should compensate the People's Education Press for more than 8,000 yuan. Yesterday, the Nanjing Intermediate Court released the top ten cases of intellectual property protection in 2013, including this case.

The Nanjing Gulou Court held at first instance that Jiangsu People's Publishing House's use of the same catalog did not constitute structural infringement, but the use of the same content constituted content infringement. Because any publishing house that wants to publish teaching supplementary books must compile them in accordance with the catalog order of the textbook. If the same catalog order is prohibited for compiling teaching supplementary books, it will inevitably lead to a monopoly in the teaching supplementary book market. However, the reproduction of the content of the textbooks in teaching supplementary books infringes on the copyright of the People's Education Press, such as the right of signature, the right of reproduction, and the right of distribution. Based on this, the Jiangsu People's Publishing House was ordered not to use the relevant content, stop selling the published books, and compensate the People's Education Press for economic losses of RMB 3,000 and reasonable expenses of RMB 5,206 paid to stop the infringement.

The People's Education Press appealed the decision. After hearing the case, the Nanjing Intermediate Court held that the catalog played an indexing and indicating role, and rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment. The presiding judge of the case believed that the determination that the catalog structure was not infringing effectively curbed the monopoly behavior in the teaching supplementary book market and was conducive to encouraging the publication of various, practical and high-quality teaching supplementary books. Textbooks and teaching supplementary books carry the teaching and understanding of the basic knowledge of the national education plan and curriculum requirements, and not only have commercial interests, but also have obvious public interest attributes. Correspondent Zhongyuan

Other nine cases

1. The defendant Yu violated the contractual agreement and relevant confidentiality regulations with Minghe Company, used its trade secrets without authorization, and caused significant losses to the trade secret right holder. His behavior constituted the crime of infringing trade secrets. The court sentenced Yu to one year in prison, suspended for one year and six months, and fined him RMB 600,000.

2. Case of the crime of selling goods with counterfeit registered trademarks and the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks by Ke, Tan, Ding, Li, Yao and others. Ke and others sold or used many well-known foreign wine brands and famous Chinese red wine brands on goods, which constituted the crime of selling goods with counterfeit registered trademarks or the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks, and were sentenced to prison terms ranging from two years and six months to one year in prison with a suspended sentence of one year and three months, and fined.

3. Case of copyright infringement dispute between plaintiff Lishui housekeeping company and defendant Nanjing human resources company. Lishui housekeeping company sued Nanjing human resources company for infringing its "Auntie Ning" trademark and copyright of art works. The court ruled that the defendant should stop the infringement and compensate the plaintiff for economic losses of 5,000 yuan.

4. Two cases of copyright ownership and infringement disputes between plaintiff Sanggao American Company and defendant Gaochun ceramic company, Kong and Lian. The court held that the registration certificate of the United States Copyright Office provided by Sanggao Company did not have drawings, and it could not be determined that the plaintiff enjoyed the copyright of the two-dimensional art work "NOVABLACK4932" claimed by the plaintiff, namely, the flat plate, bowl (with handle), cup, and soup cup, and rejected the plaintiff's claim.

5. Case of trademark infringement and unfair competition dispute between the plaintiff Sany Heavy Industry Co., Ltd. and the defendant Suzhou Six Star Sany Logistics Co., Ltd. The court held that the defendant's infringement was subjectively intentional and the defendant's infringement was of many types, and decided that the defendant should compensate the plaintiff for economic losses and reasonable expenses of 300,000 yuan for rights protection, and bear civil liability for eliminating the impact.

6. Case of copyright infringement dispute between the plaintiff Beijing Hanyi Keyin Co., Ltd. and the defendants Nanjing Osmanthus Duck Co., Ltd., Nanjing Hanfuxing Food Co., Ltd., and Central Warehouse Supermarket Co., Ltd. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant used the font invented by it on the product, which constituted infringement. The court ordered the defendant to pay RMB 80,000 in compensation and rejected other claims. The defendant appealed and the two parties reached a settlement agreement in the second instance.

7. Case of unfair competition between the plaintiff Wuxi Huamei Elevator Company and the defendant Jiangsu Saibang Elevator Company. The plaintiff believed that the defendant's registration and use of the corporate name of Jiangsu Huamei Company and the use of the corporate name of Wuxi Huamei Company in external business activities constituted unfair competition. In view of the fact that the defendant had changed the corporate name of the alleged infringement in accordance with the relevant industrial and commercial handling decision, the court ruled that the defendant should stop using the plaintiff's corporate name and compensate the plaintiff for economic losses.

8. Case of trademark infringement between the plaintiff Nanjing Yangzi Composite Materials Company and the defendants Wuxi Weili Plastic Packaging Company and a certain sales center in Nanjing. The Jiangning Court held that the defendant Wuxi Weili Plastic Packaging Company and a certain sales center in Nanjing produced and sold "Ningyang" brand construction adhesives, and ordered them to stop the infringement, compensate for losses and eliminate the impact.

9. Case of infringement of new plant variety rights between the plaintiff Shandong Denghai Seed Company and the defendants Fengxian Seed Company and a certain Henan Seed Company. The court ruled that the defendant, a certain seed company in Fengxian County, should immediately stop selling "Xianyu 335" corn seeds, compensate the plaintiff Shandong Denghai Seed Company for economic losses of 200,000 yuan, and dismissed the plaintiff Shandong Chenghai Seed Company's other claims.

Plastic Industry Video