目錄
序 言加強國際司法交流與合作 共創(chuàng)知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護事業(yè)的美好未來…… 中華人民共和國二級大法官、**副院長 陶凱元 1*章 商標案件姓名權(quán)可以構(gòu)成商標法保護的“在先權(quán)利”——邁克爾·杰弗里·喬丹與商標評審委員會、喬丹體育股份有限公司商標爭議行政系列糾紛案 …………………………………3商標國際注冊申請人應(yīng)當獲得合理的補正機會——克里斯蒂昂迪奧爾香料公司與商標評審委員會商標申請駁回復(fù)審行政糾紛案 ……………………………………………………25惡意取得并行使商標權(quán)的行為不受法律保護——王碎永與深圳歌力思服裝實業(yè)有限公司等侵害商標權(quán)糾紛案…………………………………………………………………………37樓盤名稱與注冊商標權(quán)的保護及擅自使用他人企業(yè)名稱的判斷——廣州星河灣實業(yè)發(fā)展有限公司、廣州宏富房地產(chǎn)有限公司與江蘇煒賦集團建設(shè)開發(fā)有限公司侵害商標權(quán)及不正當競爭糾紛案…… 48中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集(2014-2018)-正式出版物.indd 1 2018/10/10 14:43:412The Classical Cases of Intellectual Property Rights on Judicial Protection in China中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集 判斷中外文商標是否構(gòu)成近似應(yīng)當考慮二者是否已經(jīng)形成了穩(wěn)定的對應(yīng)關(guān)系——拉菲羅斯柴爾德酒莊與商標評審委員會、南京金色希望酒業(yè)有限公司商標爭議行政糾紛案 ………………………………… 60商標法關(guān)于“其他不正當手段取得注冊”的認定——李隆豐與商標評審委員會、三亞市海棠灣管理委員會商標爭議行政糾紛案 …………………………………………………… 69電視節(jié)目名稱在商標法意義上的使用與侵權(quán)判斷——金阿歡與江蘇省廣播電視總臺、深圳市珍愛網(wǎng)信息技術(shù)有限公司侵害商標權(quán)糾紛案 ………………………………………… 78商品名稱作為未注冊*保護的司法標準——“新華字典”侵害商標權(quán)及不正當競爭糾紛案 ………… 94第二章 專利案件藥品制備方法專利侵權(quán)糾紛中被訴侵權(quán)藥品制備工藝的查明——禮來公司與常州華生制藥有限公司侵害發(fā)明專利權(quán)糾紛案……………………………………………………………………115設(shè)計特征的認定及對外觀設(shè)計近似性判斷的影響——浙江健龍衛(wèi)浴有限公司與高儀股份公司侵害外觀設(shè)計專利權(quán)糾紛案 ……………………………………………………………147馬庫什權(quán)利要求的性質(zhì)、在無效程序中的修改方式和創(chuàng)造性判斷方法——專利復(fù)審委員會與北京萬生藥業(yè)有限責任公司、*三共株式會社發(fā)明專利權(quán)無效行政糾紛案 ……………………………156產(chǎn)品說明書是否屬于專利法意義上的公開出版物——蒂森克虜伯機場系統(tǒng)(中山)有限公司與中國國際海運集裝中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集(2014-2018)-正式出版物.indd 2 2018/10/10 14:43:413 Contents 目錄 箱(集團)股份有限公司、深圳中集天達空港設(shè)備有限公司、廣州市白云國際機場股份有限公司侵害發(fā)明專利權(quán)糾紛案………170專利權(quán)人與侵權(quán)人的事先約定可以作為確定專利侵權(quán)損害賠償數(shù)額的依據(jù)——中山市隆成日用制品有限公司與湖北童霸兒童用品有限公司侵害實用新型專利權(quán)糾紛案 ……………………………………179被侵權(quán)人向網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者所發(fā)出的有效通知、網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者接到通知后所應(yīng)采取的必要措施的判斷方法——威海嘉易烤生活家電有限公司與永康市金仕德工貿(mào)有限公司、浙江天貓網(wǎng)絡(luò)有限公司侵害發(fā)明專利權(quán)糾紛案 ………………190第三章 著作權(quán)案件根據(jù)同一歷史題材創(chuàng)作作品中的必要場景和有限表達方式不受著作權(quán)法保護——張曉燕與雷獻和、趙琪、山東愛書人音像圖書有限公司著作權(quán)侵權(quán)糾紛案 ……………………………………………………211民間文學(xué)藝術(shù)衍生作品的表達系獨立完成且有創(chuàng)作性的部分受著作權(quán)法保護——洪福遠、鄧春香與貴州五福坊食品有限公司、貴州今彩民族文化研發(fā)有限公司著作權(quán)侵權(quán)糾紛案 …………………………228書信手稿的性質(zhì),手稿拍賣與著作權(quán)侵權(quán)糾紛案件中的訴前行為保全——楊季康與中貿(mào)圣佳國際拍賣有限公司書信手稿拍賣訴前行為保全案 ……………………………………………………………248“云音樂”平臺侵害信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳播權(quán)訴前行為保全的審查判斷——深圳市騰訊計算機系統(tǒng)有限公司與廣州網(wǎng)易計算機系統(tǒng)有限中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集(2014-2018)-正式出版物.indd 3 2018/10/10 14:43:414The Classical Cases of Intellectual Property Rights on Judicial Protection in China中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集 公司、網(wǎng)易(杭州)網(wǎng)絡(luò)有限公司、杭州網(wǎng)易雷火科技有限公司、中國聯(lián)合網(wǎng)絡(luò)通信有限公司湖北省分公司、廣東歐珀移動通信有限公司侵害音樂作品信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳播權(quán)糾紛行為保全申請案……262行為保全的實體審查要件、網(wǎng)游侵權(quán)案件中難以彌補損害的認定、游戲整體下線及玩家利益的保護——暴雪娛樂有限公司等與成都七游科技有限公司等著作權(quán)侵權(quán)及不正當競爭糾紛訴中行為保全案 ……………………………279思想與表達的劃分、涉文學(xué)作品侵害改編權(quán)的判定思路——陳喆(筆名 :瓊瑤)與余征(筆名 :于正)等侵害著作權(quán)糾紛案 ……………………………………………………………295第四章 壟斷、競爭案件知名商品特有包裝裝潢權(quán)益歸屬的確定——廣藥集團與加多寶公司等擅自使用知名商品特有包裝裝潢糾紛案 ……………………………………………………………313互聯(lián)網(wǎng)領(lǐng)域相關(guān)市場界定及濫用市場支配地位行為的分析方法——奇虎公司與騰訊公司濫用市場支配地位糾紛案 …………324經(jīng)營者占有市場支配地位的認定——吳小秦與陜西廣電網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳媒(集團)股份有限公司捆綁交易糾紛案 ……………………………………………………………349互聯(lián)網(wǎng)市場背景下對反不正當競爭法第二條規(guī)定的適用及技術(shù)創(chuàng)新、自由競爭和不正當競爭的界限——北京奇虎科技有限公司、奇智軟件(北京)有限公司與騰訊科技(深圳)有限公司、深圳市騰訊計算機系統(tǒng)有限公司不正當競爭糾紛案 ………………………………………………………368中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集(2014-2018)-正式出版物.indd 4 2018/10/10 14:43:415 Contents 目錄 商業(yè)秘密侵權(quán)訴訟中行為保全措施的審查與適用——美國禮來公司、禮來(中國)研發(fā)公司訴黃孟煒侵害技術(shù)秘密糾紛案 ………………………………………………………379解決權(quán)利沖突的原則 :保護在先權(quán)利與權(quán)利共存并重——北京趣拿信息技術(shù)有限公司與廣州市去哪信息技術(shù)有限公司不正當競爭糾紛案 ………………………………………………393商業(yè)秘密中客戶名單的認定,以及侵權(quán)人承擔停止侵權(quán)民事責任的適用——鶴壁市反光材料有限公司與宋俊超、鶴壁睿明特科技有限公司、李建發(fā)侵害商業(yè)秘密糾紛案 ……………………………406第五章 植物新品種案件為確保新品種繼續(xù)生產(chǎn),判令持父本母本雙方當事人相互授權(quán)許可——天津天隆種業(yè)科技有限公司與江蘇徐農(nóng)種業(yè)科技有限公司侵害植物新品種權(quán)糾紛案 ………………………………………425第六章 集成電路布圖設(shè)計案件集成電路布圖設(shè)計專有權(quán)的侵權(quán)判定——鉅泉光電科技(上海)股份有限公司與深圳市銳能微科技有限公司、上海雅創(chuàng)電子零件有限公司侵害集成電路布圖設(shè)計專有權(quán)糾紛案 ……………………………………………………443第七章 知識產(chǎn)權(quán)刑事案件銷售記錄刷信譽行為的辯解無以證實,不予采信——郭明升、郭明鋒、孫淑標假冒注冊商標案 ………………463中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集(2014-2018)-正式出版物.indd 5 2018/10/10 14:43:416The Classical Cases of Intellectual Property Rights on Judicial Protection in China中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集CONTENTSPrefaceFostering International Judicial Exchanges and Cooperation for a Brighter Future of Intellectual Property Protection.....................Hon. Ms. TAO Kaiyuan, Justice, Vice-President of the SupremePeople's Court of the People's Republic of China 3Chapter 1Trademark CasesName Right Can Constitute “pre-existing right” Protected by Trademark Law——Michael Jeffrey Jordan v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board and QIAODAN Sports Co., Ltd................................................ 13An Applicant for International Trademark Registration Should Have a Reasonable Chance to Make Supplements and Corrections——Christian Dior Perfumes LLC v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board................................................................................................... 30Malicious Acquisition and Exercise of Trademark Rights is not Protected by Law——Wang Suiyong v. Ellassay............................................................. 42Protection for Name of Real Estate Property and Right to Registered Trademark, and Judgment on Unauthorized Use of Another Enterprise's Name中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集(2014-2018)-正式出版物.indd 6 2018/10/10 14:43:417 Contents 目錄 ——Guangzhou Star River Industry Development Co., Ltd. and Guangzhou Hongfu Real Estate Co., Ltd. v. Jiangsu Weifu Group Construction & Development Co., Ltd. ........................................................................ 53Judging Whether Two Trademarks in Chinese and Foreign Languages are Similar Requires Considering Whether the Two Constitute a Stable Correspondence——Chateau Lafite Rothschild v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board and Nanjing Gold Hope Wine Industry.................................... 64Recognition of “Registration Obtained by Other Improper Means” Under the Trademark Law——Li Longfeng v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board and Sanya Haitangwan Management Committee...................................... 73Judgment on Use and Infringement of TV Program Names from the Perspective of Trademark Law——Jin Ahuan v. Jiangsu Broadcasting Corporation and Shenzhen Zhenai.com Information Technology Co., Ltd. ................................... 85Judicial Protection Standard for Product Name Constitute of Unregistered Well-Known Trademark ——Commercial Press Co.,Ltd v. Sinolingua Co., Ltd. .................... 102Chapter 2Patent CasesIdentification of the Preparation Nethod of the Alleged Infringing Drug in Patent Infringement Dispute——Eli Lilly & Co. v. Watson Pharmaceuticals (Changzhou) Co., Ltd. .................................................................................................... 129Judgment on Determination of Design Features and Their Influence on Design 中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集(2014-2018)-正式出版物.indd 7 2018/10/10 14:43:418The Classical Cases of Intellectual Property Rights on Judicial Protection in China中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集 Similarity——Jianlong v. Grohe ....................................................................... 151The Nature of the Markush Claim, the Amendment to It in the Invalidation Proceeding and the Method for the Inventive Step Judgment——Patent Reexamination Board v. Beijing Winsunny Harmony Science & Technology Co., Ltd., Daiichi Sankyo Co.,Ltd. ............................ 162Whether or Not Product Manuals Are Considered as Publications as Defined in the Patent Law ——ThyssenKrupp Airport Systems (Zhongshan) Co., Ltd. v. China International Marine Containers (Group) Ltd., Shenzhen CIMC Tianda Airport Equipment Co., Ltd., and Guangzhou Baiyun International Airport Co., Ltd. ............................................................................... 174Prior Agreements Between the Patentee and Infringer Can Be the Basis to Determine the Damages of Patent Infringement ——Zhongshan Longcheng Daily Use Products Co., Ltd.v. Hubei Tongba Children Ltd. ....................................................................... 184Judging Whether the Notice Sent by the Victim of the Tort to the Network Service Provider Is Effective and Whether the Network Service Provider Has Taken Necessary Measures Upon Receipt of Such Notice——Weihai Jiayikao Home Appliances Co., Ltd. v. Yongkang Jinshide Industry and Trade Co., Ltd. and Zhejiang Tmall Network Co., Ltd. ........................................................................................... 198Chapter 3Copyright CasesThe Copyright Law Does Not Protect Necessary Scenes and Limited Expression Forms in Original Works Created on Basis of the Same 中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集(2014-2018)-正式出版物.indd 8 2018/10/10 14:43:419 Contents 目錄 Historical Theme——Zhang Xiaoyan v. Lei Xianhe, Zhao Qi and Shandong Book Lover Audio-Video and Book Co., Ltd. ....................................................... 218Expressions Independently Created and with Originality in a Derivative Folk Literary and Artistic Work Shall Be Protected by the Copyright Law——Hong Fuyuan and Deng Chunxiang v. Guizhou Wufufang Food Co., Ltd. and Guizhou Jincai Natural Culture Research & Development Co., Ltd. ............................................................................................ 236Nature of Letters and Manuscripts, Manuscript Auction and Preliminary Injunction for Copyright——Yang Jikang v. Sungari International Auction Co., Ltd. ........... 254Review and Judgment of Preliminary Injunction against “Cloud Music” Platform's Infringement of the Right to Network Dissemination of Information——Shenzhen Tencent Computer Systems Co., Ltd. v. Guangzhou NetEase Computer Systems Co., Ltd., NetEase (Hangzhou) Network Co., Ltd., Hangzhou NetEase Leihuo Co., Ltd., China United Network Communications Limited Hubei Branch, Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. ....................................................... 269Substantive Elements Reviewed for an Injunction, Affirmation of Irreparable Harm in Online Game Infringement Cases and Holistic Removal of a Game and Protection of Players' Interests——Blizzard Entertainment Inc. et al.v. Chengdu Qiyou Technology et al. .................................................................................................. 286Divide of Idea and Expression, and the Way to Judge Adaptation Right Infringement Concerning Literary Works——Chen Zhe (pen name: Chiung Yao) v. Yu Zheng (pen name: Yu Zheng) et al. ..................................................................................... 301中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集(2014-2018)-正式出版物.indd 9 2018/10/10 14:43:4110The Classical Cases of Intellectual Property Rights on Judicial Protection in China中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集Chapter 4Monopoly and Competition CasesDetermination on the Ownership of Packaging and Decoration Specific to Famous Commodities——GPHL v. JDB Company et al. ................................................... 318Analysis Methods of Internet-Related Market Definition and Abuse of Dominant Market Position——Qihoo v. Tencent on Abuse of Dominant Market Position ......... 335Recognition of Operator's Dominant Market Position——Wu Xiaoqin v. Shaanxi Broadcast & TV Network Intermediary (Group) Co., Ltd. .............................................................................. 357Applicability of Article 2 of Law Against Unfair Competition and the Boundary Among Technological Innovation, Free Competition and Unfair Competition in the Context of Internet Market——Qihoo and QGOA v. Tencent Company and Tencent Computer Company ........................................................................................... 373Review and Application of Behavioral Preservation in Trade Secret Infringement Litigations——Eli Lilly and Company and Lilly (China) Research and Development Co., Ltd. v. Huang Mengwei.............................................................. 385The Principle for Resolving Conflict of Rights: Attach Equal Importance to Protection of Prior Rights and Coexistence of Rights——Beijing Quna Information Technology Co., Ltd. v. Guangzhou Quna Information Technology Co., Ltd. ........................................... 399Ascertainment of the Client List in Trade Secret and Application of Injunctive Order against Infringer——Hebi Reflective Material Co., Ltd. v. Song Junchao, Hebi Ruimingte Technology Co., Ltd., and Li Jianfa .................................................. 413中國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護經(jīng)典案例集(2014-2018)-正式出版物.indd 10 2018/10/10 14:43:4111 Contents 目錄Chapter 5New Plant Varieties CasesOrder the Parties Separately Holding the Male plant and the Female plant of a New Plant Variety to Cross License to Each Other to Ensure Continuous Production of the New Plant Variety——Tianjin Tianlong Seed Technology Co., Ltd. v. Jiangsu Xunong Seed Technology Co., Ltd. ................................................................ 431Chapter 6Integrated Circuit Layout Design CasesJudgment on Infringement on Exclusive Right of Integrated Circuit Layout Design——HiTrend Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. v. Renergy MicroTechnologies (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Yachuang Texin Electronics Co., Ltd. ......................................................................... 451Chapter 7Criminal Cases of Intellectual Property RightDefending Statement of Faking Credibility through Unreal Sales Records Is Groundless and Unacceptable——Guo Mingsheng, Guo Mingfeng and Sun Shubiao..................... 467