Measures to protect intellectual property rights

1. A small example of protecting intellectual property rights

A small example of protecting intellectual property rights 1. Is there any short story about protecting intellectual property rights?

Cause of action: Infringement Right of signature

Du built the archway for the farmer's market, and asked Zhan to draw colored pictures on the archway based on the blueprint he provided, including the themes of the Eight Immortals crossing the sea, the friendship in the Taoyuan, and riding a thousand miles alone, as well as a landscape painting. As the main image of the archway. After the main drawing was completed, Du signed the "Eight Immortals Crossing the Sea" picture without authorization, marking Du as the producer of the painting. This was reported by local TV stations and caused a certain impact. Zhan therefore sued the court on the grounds that Du had infringed his copyright.

Processing]

The court of first instance ordered Du to remove the words indicating that Du was the producer of the painting on the "Eight Immortals Crossing the Sea" theme map of the memorial archway, and to compensate Zhan for 1,000 yuan in losses. Du was dissatisfied and appealed. The court of second instance ruled that although Zhan did not have the copyright to copy the "Eight Immortals Crossing the Sea" painting commissioned by Du, Du's signature on the painting made by others without authorization constituted infringement, and the impact should be eliminated and the loss compensated. Therefore, the original judgment is upheld.

Legal Analysis

The key to this case lies in the attitude towards copying. According to Article 52 of the current Copyright Law, copying is a type of copying. But in reality, some scholars believe that copying includes creative behavior. Some people divide copying into two types, namely "copying" copying and "making" copying. For copy-type products, the copyist does not enjoy copyright; as for "production" with creative significance, the artistic expression of the copyist is far from being a simple copy, but a new work made by the copyist based on his creative skills and techniques. , the copyist should enjoy a relatively independent copyright."

Intellectual property rights, also known as "intellectual property rights", refer to "the property rights enjoyed by the right holder for the results of his or her intellectual work", generally only Valid for a limited time.

Accept me, thank you!

2. Cases on the protection of intellectual property rights

1. Criminal cases of infringement of intellectual property rights 1. Huangweijin and other counterfeit registered trademark cases Public prosecution agency: People's Procuratorate of Mianzhu City, Sichuan Province Defendant: Huang Weijin, Chang Rongfang, Zhang Huijian, Chang Zhujia, Qiu Lunfu, Chang Chunrong, Wen Yong Cause of the case: Counterfeiting a registered trademark First instance case number: (2003) Sichuan Mianzhu Xingchu Zi No. 66 May 26, 2003, Mianzhu, Sichuan Province The Municipal People's Procuratorate filed an indictment No. 64 of Zhujian Criminal Indictment (2003), accusing the defendants Huang Weijin, Chang Rongfang, Zhang Huijian, Chang Zhujia, Qiu Lunfu, Chang Chunrong, and Wen Yong of committing the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks, and filed a lawsuit against Mianzhu, Sichuan Province. The Municipal People's Court initiated a public prosecution.

The People's Court of Mianzhu City, Sichuan Province found out after trial: Defendant Huang Weijin and defendant Chang Rongfang verbally agreed that Huang Weijin would provide the original wine, and Chang Rongfang organized packaging materials and trademarks to jointly produce counterfeit wines. Famous wines. After that, Chang Rongfang hired the defendant Wen Yong to sell "Mianzhu Daqu", "Jiangkou Chun", "Jianzhuang", "Luzhou" Laojiao Erqu, etc. The wine was transported to the rental houses rented by Chang Rongfang in Zhonghe Town, Chengdu City and Huayang Town, Shuangliu County. Defendants Chang Rongfang and Zhang Huijian organized the trademarks "Jiannanchun", "Quanxing", "Wuliangye" and "Luzhou" and packaging, and hired the defendants Chang Zhujia, Qiu Lunfu, and Chang Chunrong to clean and refill wine bottles, and affixed a total of 648 copies of the "Jian Nanchun" trademark, 300 copies of the "Quanxing" trademark, and 88 copies of the "Luzhou" trademark. , 96 copies of the "Wuliangye" trademark.

Except for "Wuliangye", the defendant Chang Rongfang hired the defendant Wen Yong to transport the wine to the Xingda Liquor Wholesale Department opened by the defendant Huang Weijin in Chengdu Southwest Food City for sale. The People's Court of Mianzhu City, Sichuan Province held that the defendants Huang Weijin, Chang Rongfang, and Zhang Huijian illegally used the trademarks of "Jiannanchun", "Wuliangye", "Quanxing", and "Luzhou" Laojiao Tequ without the permission of the registered trademark owner. packaging, the circumstances are serious, and his actions have constituted the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks.

The defendants Wen Yong, Chang Zhujia, Chang Chunrong and Qiu Lunfu knew that the above defendants were counterfeiting registered trademarks and provided them with transportation and other assistance. Their actions should be charged with the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks. *** Penalties will be punished.

The defendants Huang Weijin, Chang Rongfang, and Zhang Huijian played a major role in the crime and were the principal offenders; the defendants Wen Yong, Chang Zhujia, and Qiu Lunfu played a minor role and were accomplices, and their punishments may be reduced according to law; the defendant Chang Chunrong played a minor role. He is an accessory, and he participated in counterfeiting registered trademarks for a short time, and the circumstances are minor, so he can be exempted from punishment according to law.

The defendant Chang Zhujia committed another crime within 5 years after his release from prison. He is a recidivist and should be severely punished. On August 20, 2003, the People's Court of Mianzhu City, Sichuan Province, in accordance with Article 213, Article 25, Paragraph 1, Article 26, Paragraph 1, Paragraph 4, and Article 27, of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China According to the provisions of paragraphs 1, 2, 64 and 65, defendant Huang Weijin was sentenced to 3 years and 6 months in prison and fined 10,000 yuan; defendant Chang Rongfang was sentenced to 3 years and 6 months in prison. , and was fined 10,000 yuan; the defendant Zhang Huijian was sentenced to 3 years and 6 months in prison, and was fined 10,000 yuan; the defendant Chang Zhujia was sentenced to 1 year and 6 months in prison, and was fined 2,000 yuan; the defendant Wen Yong The defendant Qiu Lunfu was sentenced to 1 year in prison and fined 2,000 yuan; the defendant Qiu Lunfu was sentenced to 1 year in prison and fined 2,000 yuan; the defendant Chang Chunrong was exempted from criminal punishment.

After the first-instance verdict was pronounced, none of the seven defendants including Huang Weijin appealed, and the prosecutorial office did not protest, so the verdict became legally effective. 2. The case of Ying Hongxia and others selling goods with counterfeit registered trademarks. Public prosecution authority: People’s Procuratorate of Xihu District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province. Defendants: Ying Hongxia, Gu Linlin, Feng Shengwei. Cause of the case: Selling goods with counterfeit registered trademarks. First instance case number: (2004) Zhejiang Province. Hangxi Xingchu Zi No. 336 On July 5, 2004, the People's Procuratorate of Xihu District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province filed an indictment No. 285 of Hangxi Procuratorate (2004), accusing the defendants Ying Hongxia, Gu Linlin, and Feng Shengwei of selling counterfeit products. For commodity crimes involving registered trademarks, public prosecution was filed with the People's Court of Xihu District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province.

The People’s Court of Xihu District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province found out after trial: The defendant Feng Shengwei was originally a staff member of the Hangzhou office of Guangzhou Dasheng Integrated Marketing Communications Agency, from early January 2004 to February 23 of the same year. , for the purpose of illegal profit, knowing that the shampoo provided to him by "Chen Dawei" and "Ni Zhuang" in Guangzhou were counterfeit registered trademarks such as Rejoice, Head and Shoulders, and Pantene produced by Procter & Gamble (China) Company. This time, he sold counterfeit shampoo with the above-mentioned registered trademark produced by Procter & Gamble (China) worth more than 1.5 million yuan to Ying Hongxia and Gu Linlin, the former external staff of Guangzhou Procter & Gamble Company in Hangzhou, and paid a commission of 10-15 yuan per box. The illegal profits totaled more than RMB 70,000. During the same period, the defendants Ying Hongxia and Gu Linlin, for the purpose of making illegal profits, knowingly knowing that the above-mentioned shampoo was a counterfeit product, sold it to Huang, a daily chemical product dealer, seven times, from which the defendants Ying Hongxia and Gu Linlin Illegal profit of more than 150,000 yuan.

After the incident, the defendant Feng Shengwei surrendered. After trial, the Hangzhou Xihu District People's Court held that the defendants Feng Shengwei, Ying Hongxia, and Gu Linlin knowingly sold goods with counterfeit registered trademarks, and the sales amount was huge. Their actions constituted the crime of selling goods with counterfeit registered trademarks.

The defendant Feng Shengwei voluntarily surrendered and truthfully confessed his crime. He should be considered a surrender and may be given a lighter punishment in accordance with the law. On August 3, 2004, the People’s Court of Xihu District, Hangzhou City, in accordance with Articles 214, 67, paragraph 1, 25, paragraph 1, 64, 72, and According to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 73, the defendant Ying Hongxia was sentenced to 3 years in prison, suspended for 5 years, and fined RMB 50,000; the defendant Gu Linlin was sentenced to 3 years in prison, suspended for 5 years, and fined RMB 50,000. 50,000 yuan; the defendant Feng Shengwei was sentenced to 3 years in prison, suspended for 4 years, and fined 50,000 yuan.

After the first-instance verdict was announced, the defendant did not appeal and the prosecutorial office did not protest. The verdict has taken legal effect. 3. The case of copyright infringement by Wang Hongxing and Zhao Kun. Public prosecution authority: People’s Procuratorate of Haidian District, Beijing. Defendants: Wang Hongxing and Zhao Kun. Cause of the case: First instance case number of copyright infringement: (2003) Jinghai Fa Xing Chu Zi No. 2434, November 2003. On the 3rd, the Beijing Haidian District People’s Procuratorate charged the defendants Wang Hongxing and Zhao Kun with (2003) Jinghaijingjingsuizi No. 621.

3. Typical cases of intellectual property protection

Intellectual property protection mainly focuses on the maintenance of intellectual property and the importance of intellectual property.

Deeply promote the reform of the "three-in-one" trial mechanism for intellectual property civil, criminal, and administrative cases, improve the appeal mechanism for intellectual property cases, and unify trial standards. Formulate and improve standards for judging trademark and patent infringement in the process of administrative law enforcement. Standardize evidence standards for different channels such as justice, administrative law enforcement, arbitration, and mediation.

Promote the coordination and connection of administrative law enforcement and criminal justice case filing standards, improve case transfer requirements and evidence standards, formulate evidence guidelines, and smooth the connection between administrative law enforcement and criminal justice. Formulate judicial interpretations of the evidence rules for intellectual property civil litigation and strive to solve the problem of difficulty in providing evidence for right holders. Explore the establishment of a notarization and reward evidence collection system for infringements to reduce the burden of proof on right holders.

Extended information:

Relevant requirements for intellectual property protection:

1. In view of the development status of new business forms and new fields, study and strengthen the protection of patents, trademarks, copyrights, Protection of new plant varieties and integrated circuit layout designs. Explore the establishment of a drug patent linkage system and a drug patent term compensation system.

2. Study and strengthen the protection of intellectual property rights in sports event broadcasts. Strengthen the promotion and application of notarization electronic certificate storage technology. Research and establish cross-border e-commerce intellectual property protection rules and formulate protection and management standards for e-commerce platforms.

3. Compile and publish enterprise intellectual property protection guidelines, formulate contract templates, *** procedures and other operational guidelines, encourage enterprises to strengthen the construction of risk prevention mechanisms, and continue to optimize the protection environment for mass entrepreneurship and innovation. Research and formulate protection measures in areas such as traditional culture and traditional knowledge, and strengthen the protection of intellectual property rights in traditional Chinese medicine.

Central People's Government - *** The General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council issued the "Opinions on Strengthening the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights"

4. Are there any examples of intellectual property protection?

p>

"Sour and Sweet Is Me" was infringed "Sour and Sweet Is Me" is the representative song of Super Girl Zhang Hanyun. Recently, this song was included in the complete collection of Chinese Golden Classics published by Jilin Audio and Video Publishing House, triggering a controversy A lawsuit.

Zhang Hanyun’s agency, Beijing Tianzhong Cultural Development Co., Ltd., sued Beijing Wonderful Infinite Audio and Video Co., Ltd., Hebei Era Optoelectronics Co., Ltd., and Jilin Audio and Video Publishing House to the People’s Court of Dongcheng District, Beijing, demanding financial compensation. The loss was 30,000 yuan. The plaintiff claimed that Super Girl Zhang Hanyun was a contracted artist with it, and the plaintiff provided the copyright to publish Super Girl's first album "I Am Very Zhang Hanyun", which included the song "Sour, Sweet and Sour Is Me", so the plaintiff had the right to record and produce the song. rights.

In 2007, the plaintiff discovered that the first defendant, Beijing Wonderful Unlimited Co., Ltd., had sold color covers that were copied by the second defendant, Hebei Era Optoelectronics Company, and published by the third defendant, Jilin Audio and Video Publishing House, with the label "Latest Popular All-In-One" CD. The CD contains the song "Sweet and Sour Is Me". The defendant's behavior was without the plaintiff's permission and without the plaintiff's authorization, causing significant economic losses to the plaintiff. Therefore, the defendant is required to immediately stop the infringement and jointly compensate the plaintiff. The economic loss was 30,000 yuan.

During the trial, in order to support its claims, the plaintiff presented to the court the "Agent Agreement" signed between the company and Super Girl Zhang Hanyun. The contract stipulated that the plaintiff would enjoy the copyright property rights in all songs sung by Zhang Hanyun. . Since Zhang Hanyun was under 18 when the contract was signed, the contract was also signed by her mother.

In view of this, the three defendants have no objection to the plaintiff’s rights. At the same time, the defendant Beijing Wonderful Infinite Audio and Video Co., Ltd. fully admitted the sale of the infringing disc involved in the case, but pointed out that the defendant had legal purchase channels for the disc and had completely stopped selling it after September 20, 2007.

The other two defendants also acknowledged the publication and distribution of infringing CDs, but believed that the amount of compensation requested by the plaintiff was too high. In addition, the defendant Hebei Era Optoelectronics Company believed that the CD was entrusted by the defendant Jilin Audio and Video Publishing House to copy, and according to the power of attorney, the infringement liability should be borne by the Jilin side.

In view of the fact that the first defendant, Wonderful Unlimited Company, has stopped sales, the plaintiff withdrew the lawsuit against the company in court, but still claimed that the other two defendants, ***, should be equally liable for compensation. The case was not pronounced in court.

5. Typical cases of intellectual property protection

1. In practice, more and more trademark owners have begun to implement a new trademark protection strategy - "trademark copyrightization" Protect.

Specifically, it is citing Article 32 of the Trademark Law, which states that "application for trademark registration is not allowed. 2. Multiple judgments that have come into effect indicate that as long as the work meets the minimum originality requirements, the trademark logo is can constitute a work.

However, it must be pointed out that even if they are both works, there is still some originality between different works. 3. A typical issue from patent rights to copyright is if the design itself is still intact. After the design patent expires, the work will also enter the public domain.

In this regard, the author believes that 4. People who hold the "intellectual property selection principle" are worried that the invalidated design. If the design fails to enter the public domain on time, the provisions of the patent law regarding the design protection period will be ineffective, and it will also free up competitors.

5. To obtain protection from the copyright law, an invalid design must have certain characteristics. To constitute a work, it must meet the requirements of originality.

First of all, it must reach a certain level of design.

Cases of protecting intellectual property rights

1. Criminal cases of intellectual property infringement 1. Huang Weijin and other counterfeit registered trademark cases Public prosecution authority: Mianzhu City People's Procuratorate, Sichuan Province Defendants: Huang Weijin, Chang Rongfang, Zhang Huijian, Chang Zhu Jia, Qiu Lunfu, Chang Chunrong, and Wen Yong. Cause of the case: counterfeiting of registered trademarks. First-instance case number: (2003) Sichuan Mianzhu Xingchu Zi No. 66. On May 26, 2003, the Mianzhu City People’s Procuratorate of Sichuan Province filed a criminal prosecution case with Zhu (2003). ) Indictment No. 64, accusing the defendants Huang Weijin, Chang Rongfang, Zhang Huijian, Chang Zhujia, Qiu Lunfu, Chang Chunrong, and Wen Yong of counterfeiting registered trademarks, and filed a public prosecution with the People's Court of Mianzhu City, Sichuan Province.

The People's Court of Mianzhu City, Sichuan Province found after trial that the defendant Huang Weijin and the defendant Chang Rongfang verbally agreed that Huang Weijin would provide the original wine, and Chang Rongfang organized packaging materials and trademarks to jointly produce counterfeit famous wines. Chang Rongfang hired the defendant Wen Yong to transport "Mianzhu Daqu", "Jiangkou Chun", "Jianzhuang", "Luzhou" Laojiao Erqu and other wines from the Xinghong Liquor Wholesale Department opened by Huang Weijin in Huafeng Food City, Chengdu. In the rental houses rented by Chang Rongfang in Zhonghe Town, Chengdu City and Huayang Town, Shuangliu County, defendants Chang Rongfang and Zhang Huijian organized the trademarks and packaging of "Jiannanchun", "Quanxing", "Wuliangye" and "Luzhou". He also hired the defendants Chang Zhujia, Qiu Lunfu, and Chang Chunrong to clean wine bottles and refill wine, and affixed a total of 648 copies of the "Jiannanchun" trademark, 300 copies of the "Quanxing" trademark, 88 copies of the "Luzhou" trademark, and "Luzhou" trademark. 96 copies of the "Wuliangye" trademark.

Except for "Wuliangye", the defendant Chang Rongfang hired the defendant Wen Yong to transport the wine to the Xingda Liquor Wholesale Department opened by the defendant Huang Weijin in Southwest Food City, Chengdu. The People's Court of Mianzhu City, Sichuan Province held that the defendants Huang Weijin, Chang Rongfang, and Zhang Huijian illegally used "Jiannanchun", "Wuliangye", "Quanxing" and "Luzhou" Laojiao Tequ without the permission of the registered trademark owner. trademarks and packaging, the circumstances are serious, and his actions have constituted the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks.

The defendants Wen Yong, Chang Zhujia, Chang Chunrong and Qiu Lunfu knew that the above defendants were counterfeiting registered trademarks and provided them with transportation and other assistance. Their actions should be charged with the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks. *** Penalties will be punished. The defendants Huang Weijin, Chang Rongfang, and Zhang Huijian played a major role in the crime and were the principal offenders; the defendants Wen Yong, Chang Zhujia, and Qiu Lunfu played a minor role and were accomplices, and their punishments may be reduced according to law; the defendant Chang Chunrong played a minor role. He is an accessory, and he participated in counterfeiting registered trademarks for a short time, and the circumstances are minor, so he can be exempted from punishment according to law.

The defendant Chang Zhujia committed another crime within 5 years after his release from prison. He is a recidivist and should be severely punished.

On August 20, 2003, the People's Court of Mianzhu City, Sichuan Province, in accordance with Article 213, Article 25, Paragraph 1, Article 26, Paragraph 1, Paragraph 4, and Article 27, of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China According to the provisions of paragraphs 1, 2, 64 and 65, defendant Huang Weijin was sentenced to 3 years and 6 months in prison and fined 10,000 yuan; defendant Chang Rongfang was sentenced to 3 years and 6 months in prison. , and was fined 10,000 yuan; the defendant Zhang Huijian was sentenced to 3 years and 6 months in prison, and was fined 10,000 yuan; the defendant Chang Zhujia was sentenced to 1 year and 6 months in prison, and was fined 2,000 yuan; the defendant Wen Yong The defendant Qiu Lunfu was sentenced to 1 year in prison and fined 2,000 yuan; the defendant Qiu Lunfu was sentenced to 1 year in prison and fined 2,000 yuan; the defendant Chang Chunrong was exempted from criminal punishment.

After the first-instance verdict was pronounced, none of the seven defendants including Huang Weijin appealed, and the prosecutorial office did not protest, so the verdict became legally effective. 2. The case of Ying Hongxia and others selling goods with counterfeit registered trademarks. Public prosecution authority: People’s Procuratorate of Xihu District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province. Defendants: Ying Hongxia, Gu Linlin, Feng Shengwei. Cause of the case: Selling goods with counterfeit registered trademarks. First instance case number: (2004) Zhejiang Province. Hangxi Xingchu Zi No. 336 On July 5, 2004, the People's Procuratorate of Xihu District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province filed an indictment No. 285 of Hangxi Procuratorate (2004), accusing the defendants Ying Hongxia, Gu Linlin, and Feng Shengwei of selling counterfeit products. For commodity crimes involving registered trademarks, public prosecution was filed with the People's Court of Xihu District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province.

The People’s Court of Xihu District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province found out after trial: The defendant Feng Shengwei was originally a staff member of the Hangzhou office of Guangzhou Dasheng Integrated Marketing Communications Agency, from early January 2004 to February 23 of the same year. , for the purpose of illegal profit, knowing that the shampoo provided to him by Guangzhou "Chen Dawei" and "Ni Zhuang" were counterfeit registered trademarks such as Rejoice, Head and Shoulders, and Pantene produced by Procter & Gamble (China) Company. This time, he sold counterfeit shampoo with the above-mentioned registered trademark produced by Procter & Gamble (China) worth more than 1.5 million yuan to Ying Hongxia and Gu Linlin, the former external staff of Guangzhou Procter & Gamble Company in Hangzhou, and paid a commission of 10-15 yuan per box. The illegal profits totaled more than RMB 70,000. During the same period, the defendants Ying Hongxia and Gu Linlin, for the purpose of making illegal profits, knowingly knowing that the above-mentioned shampoo was a counterfeit product, sold it to Huang, a daily chemical product dealer, seven times, from which the defendants Ying Hongxia and Gu Linlin Illegal profit of more than 150,000 yuan.

After the incident, the defendant Feng Shengwei surrendered. After trial, the Hangzhou Xihu District People's Court held that the defendants Feng Shengwei, Ying Hongxia, and Gu Linlin knowingly sold goods with counterfeit registered trademarks, and the sales amount was huge. Their actions constituted the crime of selling goods with counterfeit registered trademarks.

The defendant Feng Shengwei voluntarily surrendered and truthfully confessed his crime. He should be considered a surrender and may be given a lighter punishment in accordance with the law. On August 3, 2004, the People’s Court of Xihu District, Hangzhou City, in accordance with Articles 214, 67, paragraph 1, 25, paragraph 1, 64, 72, and According to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 73, the defendant Ying Hongxia was sentenced to 3 years in prison, suspended for 5 years, and fined RMB 50,000; the defendant Gu Linlin was sentenced to 3 years in prison, suspended for 5 years, and fined RMB 50,000. 50,000 yuan; the defendant Feng Shengwei was sentenced to 3 years in prison, suspended for 4 years, and fined 50,000 yuan.

After the first-instance verdict was announced, the defendant did not appeal and the prosecutorial office did not protest. The verdict has taken legal effect. 3. The case of copyright infringement by Wang Hongxing and Zhao Kun. Public prosecution authority: People’s Procuratorate of Haidian District, Beijing. Defendants: Wang Hongxing and Zhao Kun. Cause of the case: First instance case number of copyright infringement: (2003) Jinghai Fa Xing Chu Zi No. 2434, November 2003. On the 3rd, the People's Procuratorate of Haidian District, Beijing, filed a lawsuit against Haidian District, Beijing, with the (2003) Jinghaijingjingsuizi No. 621 Indictment, accusing the defendants Wang Hongxing and Zhao Kun of committing the crime of copyright infringement.

7. Please give two examples of infringement of intellectual property rights.

As for the legal provisions, the legal provisions say "should..." or "must not...", etc., these are all considered.

I found 2 articles in the "Copyright Law" for you.

Article 46 Anyone who commits the following infringements shall, according to the circumstances, bear civil responsibilities such as stopping the infringement, eliminating the impact, making an apology, and compensating for losses: (1) Publishing his work without the permission of the copyright owner; (2) Without the permission of the copyright owner; Without the permission of the co-author, the work created in collaboration with others is published as a work created solely by oneself; (3) Without participating in the creation, for the purpose of seeking personal fame and fortune, one signs one's name on other people's works; (4) Distorting or tampering with other people's works; (5) Plagiarizing other people's works; (6) Using works in exhibitions, making movies, or using methods similar to making movies, or using works in ways such as adaptation, translation, annotation, etc., without the permission of the copyright owner, as otherwise provided for in this Law Except for those who use other people's works; (7) Remuneration should be paid but has not been paid; (8) The copyright holders of film works and works created with methods similar to filmmaking, computer software, audio and video products, or copyright-related matters have not been Leasing his works or audio and video products with the permission of the right holder, except as otherwise provided in this Law; (9) Using the layout design of books and periodicals published by the publisher without the permission of the publisher; (10) Without the permission of the performer , live broadcast or publicly transmit its live performance, or record its performance; (11) Other acts that infringe on copyright and copyright-related rights and interests.

Article 47 Anyone who commits the following infringements shall, according to the circumstances, bear civil responsibilities such as stopping the infringement, eliminating the impact, making an apology, and compensating for losses; if the interests of the public are harmed at the same time, the copyright owner may The administrative department shall order the infringement to cease, confiscate the illegal gains, confiscate and destroy the infringing copies, and may impose a fine; in serious cases, the copyright administrative department may also confiscate materials, tools, equipment, etc. mainly used to make infringing copies; If a crime is constituted, criminal liability shall be pursued in accordance with the law: (1) Copying, distributing, performing, screening, broadcasting, compiling, or disseminating the work to the public through information networks without the permission of the copyright owner, unless otherwise provided for in this law; (2) ) Publishing books for which others have the exclusive right to publish; (3) Copying and distributing audio and video recordings of their performances without the permission of the performers, or disseminating their performances to the public through information networks, as otherwise provided for in this law Exceptions; (4) Copying, distributing, and disseminating to the public through information networks the audio and video products produced without the permission of the producers of audio and video recordings, except as otherwise provided for in this law; (5) Playing or copying broadcasts without permission , television, except as otherwise provided for in this Law; (6) Without the permission of the copyright owner or the copyright-related right holder, intentionally avoiding or destroying the copyright or copyright-related protection measures adopted by the right holder for his works, audio and video products, etc. Technical measures for rights, unless otherwise provided for by laws and administrative regulations; (7) Deliberately deleting or changing the electronic rights management information of works, audio and video products, etc. without the permission of the copyright owner or copyright-related rights holder, Except as otherwise provided by laws and administrative regulations; (8) Producing and selling works that counterfeit the signature of others.

8. Please provide some short stories about patents or intellectual property rights. It should be representative and the number of words should be no more than 500.

When it comes to patents, many people have a headache because they are too professional. and obscure.

How is the scope of patent protection determined? With a patent, is it automatically possible to produce and sell patented products? In addition to protecting independent innovation, does applying for a patent have any other effect? Zhang San has a patent for a stool. This stool is very simple, and the patent is also very simple. A stool includes: a seat; and four support legs connected to the seat and supported on the ground. Zhang San's stools sold very well in the market, but after a while, Li Si found that it was uncomfortable to sit on the stool for a long time. It would be more comfortable to sit on the stool if there was a backrest, so Li Si decided to He invented the chair and prepared to apply for a patent. The improvement of the chair compared to the stool was that it had an extra backrest. Of course, the chair also had a seat and four supporting legs.

Now questions arise: 1. Can Li Si apply for a patent for a chair? Can! Applying for a patent does not require that the technological innovation solution be an original invention. Improvements based on existing products or existing technologies can also be patented.

In fact, original inventions or basic inventions are rare, especially today as science and technology become increasingly developed. Most inventions are improvements based on existing technologies, as Newton said "Why I see further than others is because I stand on the shoulders of giants."

Why can a chair be patented? Because the existing stool has no backrest, which makes it uncomfortable for people to sit on it for a long time, in order to solve this problem, a backrest is added and turned into a chair. This is the innovation of the chair, so the chair can apply for a patent. In the same way, in our R&D work, most of the work is also improved on the basis of existing technology to make product performance better, cost lower, production more efficient, etc. If these R&D results have certain Any creativity can be patented.

On the contrary, in actual work, there is a chance to invent a completely new product, but the probability is relatively small. Therefore, in research and development, don’t think that your innovations are inconspicuous and that small inventions can solve big problems.

How to protect your invention? It is still most secure to apply for a patent. 2. Can Li Si produce and sell chairs? Can't! Many people are confused, since I have applied for a patent, why can't I produce it myself? From the perspective of patent infringement, as long as a product includes all the technical features claimed in the prior patent, it falls within the scope of protection of the patent.

For a chair, although a backrest is added, it also includes a seat and four supporting legs. That is, the chair includes all the components of a stool, so it falls under the patent protection of the stool. Therefore, it can be said that if John Doe produces and sells chairs, he will infringe the stool patent. However, further speaking, since John Doe owns the patent for the chair, others, including the patentee of the stool, cannot produce the chair without John Doe's consent, otherwise it will infringe John Doe's chair patent.

For John Doe, although he cannot produce chairs, because John Doe owns the patent for chairs, he has the "monopoly" of chairs. 3. Why did John Doe apply for a chair patent? Obviously, Li Si spent money to apply for a patent not just to have a nominal monopoly, but to produce and sell chairs and gain profits from them. However, due to the existence of the stool patent, Li Si cannot produce and sell chairs, so Li Si applies for a patent. What's the point? Since the chairs are more comfortable to sit on, the market for the chairs will be very good and the profits will be considerable.

At this time, Li Si was thinking: If I can produce and sell chairs, I will definitely make a good profit, but because of the stool patent, I cannot produce chairs. Zhang San is also thinking: The market and profit of chairs must be better than my stools. If I can produce and sell chairs, I will definitely get good returns. However, since Li Si has a patent for chairs, I cannot produce and sell chairs.

Both Zhang San and Li Si are thinking that if we cooperate, we will definitely succeed. How to cooperate? There are several options: 1. Zhang San authorizes Li Si to use the stool patent, that is, Li Si can produce chairs, and Li Si pays Zhang San a certain amount of stool patent royalties; 2. Li Si authorizes Zhang San to use the chair Patent, that is, Zhang San can produce chairs, and Zhang San pays Li Si a certain chair patent royalty; 3. Zhang San and Li Si conduct patent cross-licensing, that is, Zhang San authorizes Li Si to use the stool patent, and Li Si also authorizes Zhang San to use the chair. Patent, in this way, Zhang San can produce both stools and chairs, and Li Si can produce both stools and chairs. Of course, there are many other cooperation plans. No matter which cooperation plan, both Zhang San and Li Si are happy, because they can get benefits from their respective patents, so that the benefits of the patents are revealed.

At this time, Wang Wuyi saw that the chair market was so good and wanted to produce and sell chairs. However, due to the existence of patents for stools and chairs, he had to hope to obtain the patent license from Zhang San and Li Si. However, Zhang San and Li Si Said: Sorry, only we can produce and sell stools and chairs, and no one else can discuss them. Wang Wu had no choice but to worry, but he had no choice, because he did not have a patent, so he had no way to negotiate with others, nor could he cross-license patents like Zhang San and Li Si did.

Fourth, what should I do with Wang Wu? Since the market for stools and chairs is good, Wang Wu has always wanted to enter this market, but he cannot get the patent authorization from Zhang San and Li Si. What should Wang Wu do? There are also ways: 1. Wang Wu can continue to research and improve on the basis of stools and chairs. For example, a chair only has a backrest. If I can continue to add armrests to the chair and turn it into an armchair, which will make the user more comfortable, Wang Wu can apply for a patent for the armchair.

Continue to make improvements. If the backrest of the chair can be improved to lay flat, the chair can become a multifunctional recliner. Wang Wu can continue to apply for a patent for the recliner. Since the market for armchairs and recliners will be huge, if Zhang San and Li Si want to produce armchairs and recliners, then Wang Wu will have a bargaining chip. In this way, the above story will repeat itself.

2. Wang Wu can study the patents of Zhang San and Li Si and design around them. For example, the patents of Zhang San and Li Si both say that a stool or chair has four legs, then I have five designs.