SOHO China may bring lawsuit against Chongqing Meiquan

On May 11th, SOHO China informally sent a lawyer’s letter to Chongqing Meiquan, accusing that its design for the buildings named “Meiquan 22nd Century” infringed upon the copyright of SOHO China’s masterpiece— Wangjing SOHO in Beijing. SOHO China required Chongqing Meiquan to apologize within 5 days after receiving the letter. If not, SOHO China would resort to legal procedures, forcing it to assume liabilities and compensations. Before this, Pan Shiyi, President of SOHO China and Zhang Xin, CEO of SOHO China explicitly stated the event via their microblogs.

JDB lost the Wong Lo Kat Trademark to GPH

According to the lawyer's letter, SOHO China demanded that Chongqing Meiquan immediately stop infringing the copyright and the right of use of Wangjing SOHO; stop advertising or presenting in any forms the sketch map or appearance picture of the buildings named “Meiquan 22nd Century” for its similarity to the design of Wangjing SOHO; change the design of “Meiquan 22nd Century.” According to industry insiders, cases related to the copyright of architecture designs seldom occur in China, the process of upholding rights is considered to be more than complicated due to the high professional expertise involved.

JDB lost the Wong Lo Kat trademark to GPH

Lady Gaga

The No.1 trademark case in China— the Guangzhou Pharmaceutical Holding Ltd. (GPH) v. Hong Kong Jiaduobao Group (JDB) case over the trademark Wong Lo Kat Herbal Tea (WLK) came to an end on May 11th. After 380 days in dispute, China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission ruled that the Supplemental Agreement on the Licensing of the Wong Lo Kat Herbal Tea Trademark and the Supplemental Agreement to Licensing Contract of the Wong Lo Kat Herbal Tea Trademark signed by GPH and JDB’s patent company were invalid; JDB should stop using the trademark. According to this decision, all the red bottle WLKs sold from May 2010 till now are infringing products. GPH has the right to claim compensation for its losses. Talking about purchasing counterfeits in Hong Kong, Lady GaGa was questioned by Customs Officials

Lady Gaga’s world tour concert, The Born This Way Ball in Hong Kong, attracted over 13,000 fans to attend. During the concert she exposed that she purchased counterfeit luxury products in Hong Kong and was therefore questioned by the Customs Officials. Reportedly, Lady Gaga said via twitter that she loved Hong Kong for being able to buy various counterfeit luxury products in the same street. After the affair was published by the media, the Hong Kong Customs immediately sent officials to question Gaga.

The first patent insurance in China If the right holder pays 2,000 yuan for each patent, all the expenses incurred after an infringement occurs, including investigation, litigation and lawyer fees, would be covered by the insurance company with a cap of 40,000 yuan. On April 28th, the insurance bought by Jiangsu Zhengdan Chemical Industry Co., Ltd. was signed by PICC (Jiangsu Zhenjiang). This is the first insurance policy to cover a patent.

Ten year copyright dispute over The Red Detachment of Women

Meiquan 22nd Century

Actor Feng Yuanzheng and his wife, actress Liang Danni, sued the National Ballet of China (NBC) on behalf of writer Liang Xin, claiming that its ballet The Red Detachment of Women infringed upon the copyright of the drama with the same name. They required a public apology and a compensation of 550,000 yuan. Recently, Beijing Xicheng District People’s Court heard the case. The drama The Red Detachment of Women, written by Liang Xin, was completed in 1960, and made into a movie in 1961. In 1964, NBC created a ballet using the content.

However, it was not until 1993 that NBC signed an agreement with the author and paid him 5,000 yuan as copyright licensing royalties. The agreement also failed to clarify the time limit of the license. The only timeline mentioned was in letters between the parties that the limit should be ten years.

Lafite combats counterfeits in China

Monkey King

According to Lafite’s Chinese agent ASC Fine Wines, the Domaines Barons de Rothschild (Lafite) will send representatives to combat counterfeits in China. The Lafite case, which is scheduled to begin on June 22nd, will mark the beginning of a series of litigation activities that Lafite plans to conduct against Chinese local counterfeits. In recent years, the IP rights of Lafite have been repeatedly infringed upon in China. Gong Guoliang, Director of the Public Relation Department of the ASC Fine Wines, indicated that Lafite would focus on trademark infringements this time.

Netac claims 60 million yuan compensation for patent infringement

The Red Detachment of Women

Netac Technology Co., Ltd. (Netac) delivered a public announcement saying that it has already sued the Beijing Watertek Information Technology Co., Ltd. (Watertek), the Agricultural Bank of China (ABC) and the Sub-branch of ABC in the Industrial Park of Beihai City, requiring that the defendants stop infringing activities and compensate 60 million yuan.

According to the announcement, the patent infringed upon is called The Electronic Flash Storage Method and Device Used for Data Processing Systems (No. 99117225.6), which was approved on July 24th, 2002. The Netac filed the lawsuit with Nanning Intermediate People’s Court of Guangxi Province on May 15th. The court has accepted the case.

Shanghai Animation Film Studio upholds its copyright to the Monkey King

Wangjing Soho

As the fruit of the hardworking of several generations of worker in the Shanghai Animation Film Studio, the animation film The Monkey King: Uproar in Heaven has been popular for many years, and the appearance of the Monkey King is widely known. However, the studio found that the image of the copyrighted Monkey King was printed on children’s shoes and sells well both at home and abroad.

The studio therefore brought five companies in Guangdong and Shanghai to Court, seeking compensation of 5 million yuan.

The Shanghai No.1 Intermediate People’s Court delivered a first instant decision, holding that the three of the defendants should jointly compensate the plaintiff half a million yuan as well as stop their infringing activities.