Zheng Kai hotpot restaurant suspected of plagiarism: decoration design imitation involves unfair competition
■ Observer
Even if the storefront innovations and business ideas themselves do not fall within the protection of the copyright law, they are still subject to adjustments under the Anti-Unfair Competition Law.
According to the Beijing News, the old hot pot restaurant in Chengdu, Sichuan, said that the well-known actor Zheng Kai newly opened the Huofengxiang fresh goods hot pot restaurant. The decoration style of the store is suspected of copying its hot pot restaurant. The layouts are highly similar to the roaring hall, and the investment brochures directly use the real picture of the roaring hall. In response, Huo Fengxiang responded that he has communicated with law, design and other professionals and investigated. If there is infringement, he will bear the responsibility and rectify it. Zheng Kai himself also forwarded the response statement, stating, "If there is any infringement, rectify it immediately and never condone it."
Judging from the comparison photos published by Houtang, the two store managers really looked like: Houtang used the "Pacific Theater" arch, Huo Fengxiang used the "Cathay Theatre" arch; Houtang asked the waiter to Huofengxiang prepared dishes in the early cigarette case and wooden box; Huotang used the "small vegetable market" to pile up goods, and Huofengxiang did the same; even the rough wooden dishes served by the former were also used by the latter. Pixel-level "imitation"... In his article on the official account, the various efforts of the roaring team to create original hot pot, the unwillingness to be easily imitated, jumped on the paper.
In this regard, some people were upset about the roar, saying that it was "pixel-level replication", and some netizens questioned, "Is the decoration now copyrighted?" "Hot pot restaurants that imitate the style of old Chengdu and old Chongqing are not like this. Is the decoration of the shop hall with obvious characteristics not protected by law? Is it illegal to decorate the shop halls of other people in the "cottage"? An incident of a "hard bar" star shop in a hot pot restaurant exposed this legal problem.
From a legal point of view, it is difficult for the decoration of the shop itself to produce copyright (copyright) for innovative activities, but it is protected by the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. The law stipulates that the operator shall not commit the following confusion, which may lead to the misconception that it is another person’s product or has a specific connection with others: unauthorized use of the same or similar logos, such as product names, packaging, and decoration, which have some influence on others.
The "decoration of commodities" here originally refers to the design and decoration on the packaging of the goods. However, in the judicial interpretation of the Supreme Law, the "decoration" has been expanded to the decoration of business premises and the clothing of business personnel. The overall business image with a unique style composed of decoration, the style of business equipment, and the clothing of the sales staff can be regarded as "decoration" as stipulated in the "Anti-Unfair Competition Law". That is to say, the characteristic decoration of shops and the overall business image of shops with certain influence are protected by this law.
Therefore, I believe that the newly opened hot pot restaurant constitutes "confusion" with "Huotang" in the "commercial appearance", which belongs to the "misleading misconception" behavior explicitly prohibited by the "Anti-Unfair Competition Law" and belongs to unfair competition. .
It should be noted that the roaring hot pot restaurant has a certain influence in the Chinese catering industry. The decoration of the storefront, including the waiter clothing, cups, plates and dishes, is recognized by consumers. This is also the creativity of the operator. Carefully polished crystals. Therefore, the law should protect such innovations and creativity, and should not allow the copycats to run rampant, nor can they indulge unfair competition.
Even if the storefront innovations and business ideas do not fall within the scope of copyright law protection, they are still subject to adjustments under the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. Otherwise, this kind of "pixel-level imitation" is easy to misunderstand consumers. There are connections between the two hotpot restaurants, and some people will even think that Huotang's plagiarism of Huofengxiang will seriously infringe on Huotang's legitimate business interests.
In this incident, Zheng Kai, the star behind Huotang’s “hard bar” on the front of Huotang, is also a “wit” move – after all, the lawsuit against unfair competition is long and costly, while resorting to public opinion pressure, then It will have an immediate impact on Huo Fengxiang and Zheng Kai himself. Zheng Kai’s response statement undoubtedly proved this.
In fact, from cases where Wang Zulan cos gourd was convicted of infringement and other cases, it can be seen that the intellectual property consciousness of the whole society is increasing. Engaging in intellectual property rights is destined not to be long-term and will also be severely punished by law. In the same way, the "pixel-level" plagiarism of the hot pot restaurant in the same industry may have covered a layer of dust before its signature.
□Shen Bin (media person)