China News Service, April 25. According to the official WeChat news of the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Supreme People's Procuratorate released a typical case of procuratorial organs' protection of intellectual property rights, services, and innovation-driven development on the morning of April 25.
There are 11 cases in this batch, including 5 criminal cases of trademark infringement, 2 criminal cases of trade secret infringement, 1 criminal case of copyright infringement, and 3 civil intellectual property supervision cases.
The typical cases released this time focus on the key work of the party and the state, and focus on the key areas of judicial protection of intellectual property rights.
In the process of handling cases, the procuratorial organs in various regions actively built a cross-regional case cooperation mechanism, innovated the performance model, and cracked down on upstream and downstream crimes throughout the chain, forming a joint force in intellectual property protection.
Actively perform duties in accordance with the law, carry out corporate compliance construction in cases of intellectual property infringement crimes, and promote the healthy development of related industries.
According to reports, in the case of "Infringement of Trade Secrets by Ying Company, You, and You Qi", the procuratorial organs prosecuted the crime of infringing business secrets according to law, suggested the application of injunctions to persons on probation, established a contact list mechanism for service companies, and promoted the recovery of stolen goods. It escorted the innovation and development of high-tech enterprises, maintained the order of market competition, and created a business environment governed by the rule of law.
In the case of Wei Mousheng and others selling products with counterfeit registered trademarks, the Beijing Procuratorate's Olympic-related intellectual property protection team took the initiative to discover that there were sales of infringing products related to the Winter Olympics on the online platform, and forwarded clues to the public security organs.
The procuratorial organs intervene in a timely manner to guide the investigation, strengthen communication and coordination with relevant functional departments, establish a "green channel" for Olympic-related intellectual property cases, and jointly speed up the investigation and evidence collection and evidence review, so as to create a good social atmosphere and market environment for the successful holding of the Winter Olympics.
"In the next step, the Supreme People's Procuratorate will fully implement Xi Jinping's thought on the rule of law, conscientiously implement the decision-making and deployment of the Party Central Committee, always have the "bigger of the country" in mind, carry out the centralized and unified performance of intellectual property rights inspection functions, actively perform their duties in accordance with the law, strengthen comprehensive protection, and promote the source of litigation. Governance, helping the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity, serving and guaranteeing innovation-driven development, and welcoming the victory of the Party's 20th National Congress with practical actions and outstanding achievements!" said the relevant person in charge of the Intellectual Property Procuratorate of the Supreme People's Procuratorate.
Procuratorial organs protect intellectual property
Typical Cases of Service Guarantee Innovation Driven Development
Case number one
Ying Company, You and You Qi violated trade secrets
【Key words】
Infringement of commercial secrets, bar code equipment decoding library prohibition order, service enterprise innovation and development
【gist】
Under the current background of innovation-driven development, the competition among enterprises is largely the competition of key core technologies.
The procuratorial organs escorted the innovation and development of high-tech enterprises, maintained the order of market competition, and created a law-based business environment by prosecuting crimes of infringing business secrets in accordance with the law, recommending the application of injunctions to persons on probation, establishing a contact list mechanism for service companies, and promoting the recovery of assets and damages. .
1. Basic case
Xinmoulu Automatic Identification Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Xinmoulu Company) is mainly engaged in research, development, manufacture, sales of barcode equipment, automatic identification equipment, research, development, and sales of high-tech products.
You Mou and You Mouqi were originally employees of Xinmou Lu Company and its affiliated companies. They resigned in 2005 and 2011 respectively, and later founded Shanghai Yingmou Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Yingmou Company), mainly engaged in and The production and sales of similar barcode scanning equipment of Xinmoulu Company.
You Mou is the shareholder and legal representative of Ying Mou Company, and You Mouqi is the shareholder and chairman of Ying Mou Company.
From June 2016 to July 2020, You Mou and You Mouqi knew that others had illegally obtained the UIMG decoding library of Xinmoulu Company, but still used the UIMG decoding library provided by others to produce barcode scanning equipment products similar to those of Xinmoulu Company, and It was sold to all parts of the country, causing a total loss of more than 6.14 million yuan in Xinmoulu Company.
It has been identified that the UIMG decoding library of Xinmoulu Company is technical information that is not known to the public, and Xinmoulu Company has taken corresponding confidentiality measures for it, which is a trade secret of Xinmoulu Company.
On January 6, 2021, You Mou and You Mouqi surrendered to the public security organs.
2. The performance of the procuratorial organs
On March 5, 2021, the Fuzhou Municipal Public Security Bureau of Fujian Province transferred You and Youqi to the Fuzhou People's Procuratorate for review and prosecution on suspicion of infringing trade secrets.
On March 12, 2021, the Fuzhou Municipal People's Procuratorate handed over the case to the Fuzhou Gulou District People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as the Gulou District Procuratorate) for review and prosecution.
The procuratorial organs focus on the following work: First, actively guide the public security organs to supplement investigations, effectively solve the problems of non-public knowledge identification and identity identification of commercial secrets, improve the evidence chain, and lay a solid foundation for criminal charges.
The second is to deliver a notice on the rights and obligations of the right holder in a criminal case of intellectual property infringement to Xinmoulu Company, and suggest that it appoint a staff member to represent the company as a fixed contact with the Gulou District Procuratorate to facilitate the handling of the case and provide knowledge in the follow-up. Property rights inspection services.
The third is to strengthen the interpretation and reasoning, prompting You Mou to compensate Xinmou Lu Company RMB 1 million and obtain an understanding.
The fourth is to prosecute and trace the omissions in accordance with the law. In view of the fact that the business decision of infringement of trade secrets in this case was jointly made by the shareholders of Yingmou Company, and the illegal income entered the company account, which is in line with the characteristics of the unit crime, Yingmou Company was added as the defendant unit in accordance with the law.
At the same time, the procuratorial organs dug deep into upstream and downstream crimes and successfully prosecuted five persons involved in the case.
On April 12, 2021, the Gulou District Procuratorate prosecuted the defendant company Yingmou Company and the defendants You Mou and You Mouqi for the crime of infringing business secrets, and proposed a suspended sentence for You Mouqi, and suggested the application of an injunction.
On November 19 of the same year, the People's Court of Gulou District, Fuzhou City sentenced the defendant Yingmou Company to a fine of RMB 4.05 million for the crime of infringing business secrets; sentenced the defendant You Mou to three years in prison and a fine of RMB 1 million. ; sentenced the defendant You Mouqi to two years and eight months in prison, suspended for three years, and fined one million yuan. At the same time, a restraining order was applied to prohibit the defendant You Mouqi from engaging in barcode scanning equipment and barcodes during the probation period. Production and business activities of scanning chips and barcode decoding libraries.
Neither the defendant unit nor the defendant lodged an appeal, and the judgment has come into effect.
3. Typical meaning
(1) Strengthen the comprehensive judicial protection of business secrets of enterprises, and escort the innovation and development of enterprises.
At present, barcode scanning equipment is widely used in many industries. The barcode scanning equipment produced by Xinmoulu Company using its self-developed UIMG decoding library has the competitive advantage of accurate identification and fast response, and has become a leading enterprise in the barcode scanning equipment industry.
If the trade secret is violated, it will seriously threaten the survival and development of Xinmoulu Company.
In this case, the procuratorial organs intensified their efforts to crack down on crimes involving new forms of business, new fields, and key core technologies infringing intellectual property rights, prosecuted relevant personnel for criminal responsibility in accordance with the law, actively guided the public security organs to investigate and collect evidence, added defendants, and dug deeper into upstream and downstream crimes.
Actively apply the leniency system for admitting guilt and accepting punishment, prompting the defendant to make compensation, and try to restore the loss of the right holder.
(2) Propose the application of injunctions in accordance with the law to prevent the legitimate rights and interests of enterprises from being damaged again.
According to the provisions of Article 72 of the Criminal Law, a suspended sentence may be declared according to the circumstances of the crime, and at the same time, criminals may be prohibited from engaging in specific activities during the probation period of suspended sentence.
For crimes involving intellectual property rights, through the effective use of business prohibition orders in accordance with the law, the legitimate rights and interests of enterprises will be prevented from being damaged again, the damaged social order will be repaired, and a legal business environment will be created.
The defendant in this case, You Mouqi, surrendered to the crime, was older, and voluntarily pleaded guilty and accepted punishment. The procuratorial authority suggested the application of an injunction when probation and sentencing, which is of reference significance.
(3) Establish a contact list of service enterprises to provide customized intellectual property services for right holders.
After the procuratorial organ accepts the case, it implements the notification work of the right holder's litigation rights and obligations in the criminal case of intellectual property infringement, and promptly informs the new company of the litigation rights and obligations, so as to ensure the right holder's deep participation in the litigation activities and improve the quality and efficiency of rights protection.
The procuratorial organs are not limited to handling cases, but include the right holders in the contact list of service enterprises, establish a normal communication and contact mechanism, provide customized legal services for enterprises, help establish and improve the internal control mechanism for intellectual property protection, and regularly organize legal training, lectures and publicity, etc. , to improve the level of intellectual property protection of enterprises.
Case 2
Cai's case of infringement of trade secrets
【Key words】
Substantial participation of the right holder of business information in the crime of infringing trade secrets
【gist】
As business secrets, business information can promote the business activities of the right holder, bring market competitive advantages, and have commercial value, and should be strictly protected.
Procuratorial organs shall actively perform their legal supervision duties in accordance with the law, strengthen cooperation and cooperation with relevant departments, and severely crack down on criminal acts of illegally obtaining and using business information, infringing on the commercial secrets of rights holders, and disrupting the market order of fair competition, and contributing to the creation of a favorable environment for innovation and development. .
1. Basic case
Nike Commercial (China) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Nike) integrates commodity price information and inventory (in-stock and to-be-arrived) information and other operational information for commercial operations, and signs confidentiality agreements with employees, agreeing to All project and internal information about Nike Inc. is confidential.
Since 2018, Cai established and operated the “Discount Store Sweeping” WeChat applet. Knowing that others downloaded the above business information from Nike’s internal network disk in violation of regulations, he still paid for it, and used it on the WeChat applet he operated, and charged at the same time. The corresponding membership fee is profitable.
After identification, the price information and inventory (in-stock and to-be-arrived) information of Nike's products belong to the business information that is not known to the public. , which is substantially the same as Nike's operating information.
As of December 2020, Cai's illegal income totaled more than 900,000 yuan.
2. The performance of the procuratorial organs
On November 26, 2020, upon a report by the rights holder Nike, the Yangpu Branch of the Shanghai Public Security Bureau filed a case for investigation of Cai's alleged infringement of trade secrets.
The Yangpu District People's Procuratorate of Shanghai (hereinafter referred to as the Yangpu District Procuratorate) intervened in the investigation in a timely manner, and guided the public security organs to extract the membership fee collection records, WeChat transaction details and other electronic data in the WeChat applet from the seized computers, hard disks, and mobile phones, and fix them in time. first-hand objective evidence.
Strictly implement the notification system of rights holders' litigation rights and obligations in criminal cases of intellectual property infringement, require rights holders to provide additional evidence and materials on the use of confidentiality measures, the commercial value of the information involved in the case, and fully listen to their opinions and suggestions.
Guide the public security organs to perform an item-by-item restoration analysis and comparison between the electronic data extracted from the storage device involved in the case and the data used by Cai, and to find out the illegal use of business information for profit.
On January 29, 2021, the Yangpu District Procuratorate approved the arrest of Cai on the crime of violating trade secrets.
On March 29, 2021, the public security organs transferred the prosecution to the Yangpu District Procuratorate for the crime of infringing trade secrets by Cai.
The Yangpu District Procuratorate has done three main tasks: First, commissioned a specialized appraisal agency to compare the business information used by Cai with the business information of the right holder.
The second is to accurately identify the business information involved as a trade secret.
In this case, the commodity price and inventory information directly affect the operator's raw material purchase quantity, purchase price, production schedule, product sales plan, etc. Competitors can adjust their business strategies accordingly after learning the above information, and then gain a competitive advantage. value.
And the operator has taken confidentiality measures, and the relevant information is not known to the public.
To sum up, the business information in this case is valuable, confidential and secret, and should be protected as a business secret.
The third is to strengthen the interpretation and reasoning, urge Cai to actively refund compensation, and apply the leniency system for plea guilty and punishing according to law.
On April 26, 2021, the Yangpu District Procuratorate prosecuted the defendant Cai for the crime of violating trade secrets.
On July 23, 2021, the Shanghai Yangpu District People's Court sentenced the defendant Cai to eight months in prison and a fine of RMB 960,000 for the crime of infringing business secrets.
The defendant did not appeal, and the judgment has come into effect.
3. Typical meaning
(1) To crack down on crimes of infringing business information and trade secrets in accordance with the law, and maintain a fair and orderly market environment.
Business information is an important form of trade secrets, and its types include customer lists, transaction prices, supply information, marketing strategies, etc., and have important commercial value for market players to gain competitive advantages.
While protecting technical information, procuratorial organs should also pay attention to the strict protection of business information.
In recent years, the high-end sneaker market has been in short supply. Some "sneaker scalpers" groups have used the illegally obtained business information of the right owners to hoard and speculate, disrupting the normal market order.
In the process of handling cases, the procuratorial organs can actively perform their duties, cooperate with relevant departments, make precise attacks, create a standardized and orderly business environment, and maintain a good market competition order.
(2) Clarify difficult issues in the application of laws, and clarify the methods for identifying business secrets of business information.
When handling business information infringement cases, it is necessary to first determine whether the business information involved is a business secret.
The inventory information and price information in this case are the information formed by the right holder in the long-term operation that is not known to the public, and it is the basis for the operator to make market decisions, and has high commercial value. The enterprise has taken confidentiality measures to protect it.
The procuratorial organ comprehensively analyzes the specific content, formation process, confidentiality measures, non-public knowledge, commercial value and other aspects of the business information in this case, and determines that it is a commercial secret.
(3) Informing the rights holders of their litigation rights and obligations, and guiding the rights holders to substantively participate in the litigation.
In the process of handling criminal cases of infringement of commercial secrets, procuratorial organs should focus on actively guiding rights holders to substantively participate in criminal proceedings, and encourage rights holders to fully express their opinions on professional issues involved in the case, so as to improve the quality and efficiency of procuratorial case handling.
In this case, the procuratorial organ intervened at the first time, visited the enterprise on the spot, introduced the handling process and evidence standards of commercial secret criminal cases, etc., required the right holder to objectively state the knowledge scope, storage method, and confidentiality measures of the business information, and provided a non-disclosure agreement. Evidence that proves the commercial value of business information, such as original data of business information, reinforces the key evidence for the identification of business secrets and infringement, and lays a solid foundation for the accurate application of the law and the forceful prosecution of crimes.
Case 3
A case of copyright infringement by Guoan Integrated Circuit Design Co., Ltd., Xu and Tao
【Key words】
Sampling and identification of computer software binary code for the crime of copyright infringement
【gist】
In handling copyright infringement cases involving chips, the procuratorial organs have stepped up their efforts to handle cases and attacked hard to create shock and deterrence, stimulate technological innovation, and maintain fair competition.
Through the identification and comparison of the solidified binary code in the chip and the solidified binary code in the GDS file, and the evidence of the whole case, it is determined that the computer software is substantially similar.
Fully consider the confidentiality demands of enterprises, and innovate and improve the methods of collecting, reviewing and cross-examining evidence related to core technologies.
1. Basic case
The right unit, Qinmou Microelectronics Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Qinmou Company), enjoys the computer software copyright of Qinmou micro USB to serial parallel port chip CH340 built-in firmware program software V3.0.
The computer software is applied to the CH340 chip produced and sold by Qinmou Company.
CH340 chips are widely used in navigators, code scanners, 3D printers, educational robots, POS machines and other fields.
Guomou Integrated Circuit Design Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Guomou Company) was established in 2003.
In 2016, Tao, as a salesperson of a company in China, found that Qin's CH340 chips had a large sales volume and a high market share during market research and promotion, so he obtained genuine CH340 chips from the market for copying.
As the general manager of a company in the country, Xu is responsible for all the company's production and operation. Knowing that the company in the country has not obtained the authorization of the company, he entrusts another company to crack the CH340 chip, extract the GDS file, and then entrust another company. Production of mask tools, wafers and packaging, and sales of GC9034 chips from a company in China to seek illegal benefits.
From September 2016 to December 2019, a company in China sold a total of more than 8.3 million GC9034 chips that infringed the copyright of a company in Qin, with a sales amount of more than RMB 7.3 million, and the above proceeds belonged to the unit.
Among them, Tao sold more than 7.8 million infringing chips, with a sales amount of more than 6.8 million yuan.
After sampling and identification, the solidified binary code in the GC9034 chip of a company in China is the same as the solidified binary code generated by compiling and converting the source code of the copyrighted computer software of a company of Qin, and the similarity is 100%.
The GDS file ROM layer binary code of a company in China is the same as the solidified binary code generated by the compilation and conversion of the copyrighted computer software source code of Qinmou company, and the similarity is 100%. Degree 100%.
2. The performance of the procuratorial organs
On January 19, 2020, the Yuhuatai Branch of the Nanjing Municipal Public Security Bureau of Jiangsu Province submitted to the People's Procuratorate of Yuhuatai District, Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province (hereinafter referred to as the Yuhuatai District Procuratorate) for approval of arrest on suspicion of Xu and Tao selling commodities with counterfeit registered trademarks.
After examination, the Yuhuatai District Procuratorate found that the infringing chips sold by a company in the country did not use the registered trademark of Qinmou company, and did not constitute the crime of selling commodities with counterfeit registered trademarks, and decided not to approve the arrest of Xu and Tao.
At the same time, the Yuhuatai District Procuratorate believed that the solidified binary code in the CH340 chip belonged to the target program.
According to the "Regulations on the Protection of Computer Software", the source program and the target program of the same computer program are the same work. This case may be suspected of infringing the copyright of the computer software of the rights company. It is recommended that the public security organs investigate and collect evidence in the direction of copyright infringement.
On December 4, 2020, the public security organs transferred Xu and Tao for copyright infringement for review and prosecution.
In the process of handling the case, the Yuhuatai District Procuratorate, together with the public security organs, comprehensively listened to the confidentiality demands of the rights unit.
In view of the fact that the source code of the chip can be copied and easily leaked, we innovatively adopt the forensic and review methods of "in-factory inspection, synchronous review, in-factory sealing, and in-factory cross-examination".
When investigators inspect and extract the source code in the company, the procuratorial organs simultaneously review the evidence, and the company personnel are present to witness the whole process. They are in charge of keys and passwords to ensure that the source of evidence is legitimate and the content is objective and true.
During the cross-examination stage of the trial, the judges, prosecutors, defendants and defenders went to Qinmou company to unpack, decrypt and cross-examine on the spot to ensure that the chip source code did not leave the company premises during the judicial case handling process.
At the same time, the Yuhuatai District Procuratorate held that the infringement of the computer software copyright and the use of it to manufacture chips for profit was the act of a company in China, and the illegal gains were also owned by a company in China, and a company in China was added as a defendant in accordance with the law.
On April 26, 2021, the Yuhuatai District Procuratorate filed a public prosecution against the defendant company Guomou Company, the defendants Xu and Tao for the crime of copyright infringement.
On July 14, 2021, the People's Court of Yuhuatai District, Nanjing City sentenced the defendant company, Guomou Company, to a fine of RMB 4 million for copyright infringement; sentenced the defendant Xu to a fixed-term imprisonment of four years and a fine of RMB 360,000; The defendant Tao Mou was sentenced to three years and two months in prison and a fine of RMB 100,000.
Both the defendant unit and the defendant refused to accept the first-instance judgment and appealed.
On October 28, 2021, the Nanjing Intermediate People's Court ruled to reject the appeal and upheld the original judgment.
3. Typical meaning
(1) Strengthen judicial protection of chip intellectual property rights and stimulate innovation and creativity.
Self-reliance and self-improvement in science and technology is the strategic support for national development.
Procuratorial organs should strengthen the judicial protection of intellectual property rights in high-tech industries such as artificial intelligence, quantum information, and integrated circuits, crack down on intellectual property crimes that infringe key core technologies in accordance with the law, safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of enterprises, and enhance the power of technological innovation of enterprises.
The defendant company and the defendant in this case produced and sold the infringing chips in large quantities by copying the computer software in the chips of others, causing heavy economic losses to the rights holders.
At the beginning of filing the case, the public security organ investigated and reported the case of trademark infringement. The procuratorial organ strictly examined and determined that it did not constitute a crime of infringement of trademark rights. At the same time, according to the circumstances of the case, the public security organ was suggested to adjust the investigation direction, and finally the whole case was determined to constitute a crime of copyright infringement.
(2) Accurately determine that the computer software is substantially similar, and accurately apply the law.
In this case, the infringing chip produced by the defendant did not directly copy the source code of the firmware program software built into the chip of the right holder, but instead committed the crime of infringement by extracting the binary code of the ROM layer of the chip.
After careful research and consultation with experts, the procuratorial organs not only requested the public security organs to compare the solidified binary codes in the GC9034 chip of a certain company in China by sampling, and obtained the support of appraisal opinions, but also requested the public security organs to supplement the "infringing products" used in the production of infringing products. Template” is the only relevant evidence that remains unchanged, and went to the wafer manufacturer to obtain the “template” for manufacturing the CH340 chip and the infringing chip, that is, the GDS file. Compared with the solidified binary code, the similarity is 100%.
Comprehensive review of the whole case evidence such as appraisal opinions, testimony of witnesses, confessions of the defendant, statements of the rights holder, etc., and the criminal acts of infringement of computer software copyrights shall be determined in accordance with the law.
(3) Taking into account the needs of handling cases and the demands of the enterprise, and escorting the business development of the enterprise in an all-round way.
Chip intellectual property is the foundation of innovation and development of high-tech enterprises and has great commercial value.
When handling such cases, if the procuratorial organ has access to the core technical information of the enterprise such as chip source code, it can adjust the solid evidence and review ideas in a timely manner according to the characteristics of the forensic object, protect the intellectual property rights of the enterprise in an all-round way, and achieve the best case-handling effect.
In this case, the procuratorial organ fully considered the real needs of the right holder to protect intellectual property rights and business results, and, together with relevant departments, took into account the statutory requirements for handling the case and the actual demands of the enterprise, and innovated the methods of electronic data collection, review, sealing and cross-examination involving the source code of chips. While avoiding the “secondary infringement” of the technology involved, ensure the legality, authenticity and relevance of the case evidence, promote the smooth handling of the case, and provide a useful reference for the procuratorial case handling.
Case 4
The case of Wei Mousheng and others selling products with counterfeit registered trademarks
【Key words】
The crime of selling commodities with counterfeit registered trademarks involves the whole chain of intellectual property protection of the Winter Olympics
【gist】
Combating the crime of intellectual property infringement related to the Winter Olympics in accordance with the law and strengthening the protection of intellectual property rights related to the Winter Olympics not only reflects my country's strategic deployment of implementing new development concepts, building a new development pattern, and promoting high-quality development, but also reflects my country's active implementation of international conventions and the provisions of the Olympic Charter. A firm determination in all obligations.
The procuratorial organs accurately applied the law and promptly punished the criminal acts of infringing the intellectual property rights of the Winter Olympics mascots, demonstrating the procuratorial organs' responsibility to perform their duties in accordance with the law and serve and safeguard the Winter Olympics.
1. Basic case
From November to December 2021, Wei Mousheng, Wei Mouze, and Wei Moufei sold counterfeit rights holders “Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics and Winter Paralympics Organizing Committee” through online platforms in Yiwu City, Zhejiang Province and other places (hereinafter referred to as the Beijing Winter Olympics Organizing Committee) registered trademarks of Olympic mascot dolls, key chains and other commodities.
Among them, Wei Mousheng, Wei Mouze, and Wei Moufei jointly sold dolls of infringing goods with a sales amount of more than RMB 90,000; Wei Mousheng and Wei Mouze jointly sold key chains of infringing goods with a sales amount of more than RMB 20,000.
The public security organs seized 369 dolls with counterfeit registered trademarks for sale, worth more than RMB 14,000; and seized 60 key chains with counterfeit registered trademarks for sale, with a value of more than RMB 700.
2. The performance of the procuratorial organs
In November 2021, the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics and the Winter Paralympic Games are about to open. The Beijing Shijingshan District People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as the Shijingshan District Procuratorate), as the procuratorate at the domicile of the Beijing Winter Olympics Organizing Committee, found a certain There are illegal clues about the sale of infringing products related to the Winter Olympics on the online platform, and the clues will be transferred to the Shijingshan Branch of the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau in a timely manner.
After the public security organs filed the case, the Shijingshan District Procuratorate intervened in the investigation in a timely manner, set out a detailed outline of the investigation and evidence collection, and guided the public security organs to go to Shanghai, Zhejiang and other places to collect evidence and improve the evidence chain.
On January 11, 2022, the Shijingshan District Procuratorate approved the arrest of Wei Mousheng, Wei Mouze, and Wei Moufei for the crime of selling commodities with counterfeit registered trademarks.
On January 11, 2022, the public security organs transferred the case to the Shijingshan District Procuratorate for review and prosecution.
In the stage of review and prosecution, the Shijingshan District Procuratorate guided the public security organs to continue to dig deeper into the clues of the case, and further verify the upstream producers of the infringing goods based on evidence such as online platform sales records and express delivery records of the persons who have arrived at the case; The public security organ issued a "Supplementary Transfer for Prosecution Notice" to guide them to continue to carry out investigation activities such as arrest and evidence collection, and successfully prosecuted the two upstream personnel who produced infringing goods, Gu Moujun and Gu Mouqi, and investigated their criminal responsibility according to law. .
On January 14, 2022, the Shijingshan District Procuratorate prosecuted the defendants Wei Mousheng, Wei Mouze, and Wei Moufei for the crime of selling commodities with counterfeit registered trademarks. All three defendants pleaded guilty and accepted punishment.
On January 25 of the same year, the People's Court of Shijingshan District, Beijing sentenced defendants Wei Mousheng, Wei Mouze and Wei Moufei to fixed-term imprisonment ranging from six months to ten months for the crime of selling commodities with counterfeit registered trademarks. 10,000 yuan in gold.
None of the three defendants appealed, and the verdict has come into effect.
Upstream personnel Gu Moujun and Gu Mouqi, who produced and sold infringing Olympic products, were sentenced to a separate case.
Based on the handling of the case, the procuratorial organ, in conjunction with the Municipal Public Security Bureau, Municipal Intellectual Property Office and other relevant departments, urges the online platforms and comprehensive markets involved to remove the infringing goods from the shelves and carry out rectification to standardize the market order.
Increase the publicity of intellectual property protection, and raise the awareness of the public and market players to protect Olympic-related intellectual property rights in accordance with the law through various forms such as case interpretation.
3. Typical meaning
(1) Strengthen judicial protection of intellectual property rights related to the Winter Olympics, and serve and guarantee the Beijing Winter Olympics.
Running the Beijing Winter Olympics well is my country's solemn commitment to the world. The procuratorial organs should have the "big man of the country" in mind, focus on the overall situation of the country's work, and escort the Beijing Winter Olympics with procuratorial performance.
As the main unit, the Beijing Municipal Procuratorate attaches great importance to the service guarantee of the Winter Olympics, and issued the "Beijing Procuratorate's Service and Guarantee Work Plan for the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics and Paralympic Games" to provide a solid legal guarantee for the Winter Olympics activities.
Set up an Olympic-related intellectual property protection team of the city's procuratorial organs, gather the city's procuratorial wisdom, actively connect with relevant departments of the Beijing Winter Olympics Organizing Committee, establish working mechanisms such as identifying the authenticity of Olympic-related commodities and transferring infringement clues, and jointly punish infringement of Winter Olympics-related intellectual property rights. Violations and crimes form a strong deterrent.
(2) Actively perform their duties in accordance with the law, and strive to improve the quality and efficiency of judicial case handling.
In this case, the Olympic-related intellectual property protection team of the Beijing Municipal Procuratorate actively discovered that there were sales of infringing products related to the Winter Olympics on the Internet platform during the special work, and transferred clues to the public security organs.
The procuratorial organs intervene in a timely manner to guide the investigation, strengthen communication and coordination with relevant functional departments, establish a "green channel" for Olympic-related intellectual property cases, and jointly quickly advance the work of investigation and evidence collection and evidence review to ensure that cases are handled in a timely and efficient manner in accordance with the law.
(3) Dig deep into upstream crimes to achieve full-chain crackdown and source governance.
Wei Mousheng and other three who came to the case in the early stage of the investigation of this case were all sellers of infringing goods and were at the end of the infringement chain.
In order to implement the work requirements of cracking down on the entire chain of crimes of intellectual property infringement, the procuratorial organs focused on guiding the public security organs to continue to dig for clues, successfully prosecuted two upstream personnel in the production link, and realized the complete investigation of the upstream and downstream crimes in the production and sales links. Chain strike.
Extend the effect of case handling, and urge the online platform and related markets involved in the case to carry out rectification in combination with the case, so as to achieve the comprehensive effect of "handling one case and managing one".
Strengthen the interpretation and reasoning, and create a good social atmosphere and market environment for the successful holding of the Winter Olympics.
Case 5
Shanghai Chimou Education Technology Co., Ltd. and Yaomou counterfeiting registered trademark case
【Key words】
The crime of counterfeiting a registered trademark is a service mark of the same service
【gist】
刑法修正案(十一)将服务商标纳入刑事保护范围，检察机关认真落实刑法要求，严厉打击假冒服务商标犯罪，以“物理载体呈现+服务内容固定”认定“同一种服务”及商标使用行为，为依法打击假冒服务商标犯罪提供参考借鉴。
一、基本案情
“”“”“乐高教育”等商标系乐高博士有限公司(以下简称乐高公司)注册商标，核定服务项目为第41类，包括教育、培训、娱乐竞赛等。上海赤某教育科技有限公司(以下简称赤某公司)经营范围为从事教育科技领域内的技术开发、技术咨询、技术服务等，实际经营者为姚某。
2017年7月起，赤某公司在上海市松江区新桥镇商场内租赁店铺经营“LC乐高机器人中心”，从事教育科技领域服务。2021年3月至6月，姚某将从他人处购得的假冒“”“”“乐高教育”商标的《授权书》《乐高教育教练资格证书》等文件在店铺内展示，并将“”等商标用于店铺招牌、店内装潢、海报宣传、员工服装、商场指示牌等处，假冒乐高公司正规授权门店，提供教育培训服务。经审计，2021年3月至案发，赤某公司共收取培训课时费人民币51万余元。
二、检察机关履职情况
2021年6月，上海市公安局经权利人举报发现侵犯服务商标犯罪线索并立案侦查，上海市人民检察院第三分院(以下简称上海市检三分院)及时介入侦查，引导取证。经检察机关研判，涉案公司行为侵犯了权利人的注册商标专用权，经营数额与侵权行为具有因果关系且情节严重，已涉嫌假冒注册商标罪，同时提出侦查取证意见，引导公安机关开展侦查。
2021年8月2日，上海市公安局以姚某涉嫌假冒注册商标罪移送上海市检三分院审查起诉。审查起诉期间，检察机关引导公安机关补强相关证据，形成完整证据链。一是要求服务商标权利人识别合法授权门店与侵权门店之间的差异，着重对店铺招牌、海报宣传、室内装潢、培训课件等假冒乐高商标标识的使用情况进行详细比对，明确假冒服务商标的事实。二是对涉案店铺资金去向进行补充鉴定。经鉴定，店铺大部分收入用于单位经营，且涉案店铺的经营主体以及伪造乐高教育授权书中授权对象均为赤某公司，属于单位犯罪，故依法追加赤某公司为被告单位。三是依法认定犯罪数额。服务商标的价值附随于服务活动实现，教育培训课程应视为提供服务，将该种服务的销售金额即课时费认定为非法经营数额，符合经营活动的一般认知，也与假冒商品商标案件中将涉案商品的销售金额认定为非法经营数额的逻辑相同。四是积极贯彻落实认罪认罚从宽制度。结合姚某认罪态度，依法适用认罪认罚从宽制度，对认罪认罚具结全程录音录像。
2021年9月30日，上海市检三分院以假冒注册商标罪对被告单位赤某公司、被告人姚某提起公诉。2021年11月25日，上海市第三中级人民法院以假冒注册商标罪判处被告单位赤某公司罚金人民币二十万元，判处被告人姚某有期徒刑一年，缓刑一年，并处罚金人民币六万元。被告单位、被告人均未提出上诉，判决已生效。
三、典型意义
(一)依法打击侵犯服务商标犯罪，彰显知识产权司法保护决心。服务商标作为服务品牌价值浓缩体现，具有承载服务质量和声誉、表明服务来源的作用，其重要性不亚于商品商标。近年来，假冒知名教育培训服务的行为时有发生，侵害了权利人和广大消费者合法权益。在服务商标纳入刑法保护范围的背景下，本案作为全国首例侵犯服务商标刑事案件，其成功办理彰显了检察机关对注册商标专用权“快保护”“严保护”的司法理念。
(二)探索服务商标案件认定规则，为同类案件办理提供借鉴。服务商标区别于商品商标的特点在于其指向的对象具有无形性，决定了服务商标无法直接附着于服务上，必须借助于实物载体体现。如何准确认定“同一种服务”和服务商标的“使用”问题是司法实践的难点。检察机关在审查服务分类的基础上，探索采用“物理载体呈现+服务内容固定”分别比较的方法。一方面，将被告单位在侵权店铺招牌、室内装潢、授权材料等处使用的商标与权利人商标进行对比；另一方面，通过权利人认定、证人证言、被告人供述等多种证据形式，比较两者在服务对象、服务内容等方面是否重合。经综合比较和审查判断，认定本案行为人与权利人提供的服务属于“同一种服务”。
(三)深化权利人权益保障，落实认罪认罚从宽制度。在侵犯知识产权犯罪案件办理过程中，检察机关及时向商标权利人送达诉讼权利义务告知书，听取意见建议，为权利人调阅卷宗提供便利。建议法院通知权利人出席法庭，推动权利人实质性参与刑事诉讼，实现对中外权利人的平等保护。在向被告人充分释法说理、适用认罪认罚从宽制度的同时，对认罪认罚具结全程同步录音录像，规范约束检察机关履职行为，充分保障认罪认罚的自愿性、合法性、真实性。
案例六
中某重工科技股份有限公司、刘某余等五人假冒注册商标案
【关键词】
假冒注册商标罪 企业合规 第三方监督评估 不起诉
【要旨】
检察机关在办理涉企侵犯知识产权犯罪案件中，积极开展企业合规建设，充分发挥主导作用，与第三方监督评估组织深度协作，做好合规建设前的衔接协调、合规建设中的监督配合、合规建设后的评估审查等工作，确保涉案企业“真整改”“真合规”，促进行业规范，服务创新发展。
一、基本案情
中某重工科技股份有限公司(以下简称中某公司)是一家生产起重机零部件的重工制造公司，刘某余为公司法定代表人。2020年9月，中某公司为增加业务来源，经刘某余、骆某、罗某、王某、杨某等五名公司股东一致同意，在未获得权利人中联重科股份有限公司授权的情况下，生产标注有该公司注册商标的塔式起重机标准节。2020年9月至2021年2月，中某公司将上述假冒注册商标的塔式起重机标准节销售给下游客户，销售金额共计人民币27万余元。
二、检察机关履职情况
2021年6月10日，湖南省长沙市公安局以刘某余、骆某、罗某、王某、杨某等五人涉嫌假冒注册商标罪移送长沙市人民检察院审查起诉。同年7月9日，长沙市人民检察院将该案交由长沙市岳麓区人民检察院(以下简称岳麓区检察院)办理。
岳麓区检察院审查认为，中某公司涉嫌单位犯罪。中某公司属于中小微企业，专注于起重机零部件生产，产品有较高质量和技术含量，具有“专精特新”的特点，为当地50余人创造了就业机会。涉案企业和人员短期从事假冒注册商标的违法犯罪行为，且均认罪认罚，积极赔偿权利人损失、取得权利人谅解，中某公司能够继续生产经营，承诺建立企业合规制度，具备启动第三方监督评估的基本条件，遂启动企业合规建设。
2021年9月3日，岳麓区检察院通过充分调研，向中某公司制发检察建议，指出中某公司存在的问题及合规整改目标，同时商请第三方监督评估机制管理委员会从知识产权、税务会计、工程机械等领域选出六名专家组成第三方监管组织，对中某公司进行考察。期间，检察机关多次赴涉案企业考察调研，就评估人员选配、考察模式等方面与第三方监督评估机制管理委员会交换意见，细化考察流程。检察机关通过不定期走访企业，跟踪涉案企业的合规建设情况，以实地检验的方式确保第三方监管组织履职的真实性、有效性。同年10月30日，中某公司整改完毕，第三方监管组织评估认为中某公司的合规整改合格。
2021年12月28日，岳麓区检察院组织公开听证，听证员一致认为中某公司整改效果较好，建议对企业从宽处理。同年12月31日，岳麓区检察院对中某公司及刘某余、骆某、罗某、王某、杨某等五人作出不起诉决定。检察机关针对本案反映出的工程机械行业企业合规问题，延伸检察职能，加强与行业主管部门以及行业协会的沟通协作，用好座谈会商、公开听证、进企宣传等方式，提高工程机械行业知识产权保护意识和能力，以个案合规促行业合规，推动行业健康发展，加强知识产权源头保护。
三、典型意义
(一)依法能动履职，对侵犯知识产权犯罪案件开展企业合规建设。涉案企业合规改革适用的案件类型，包括公司、企业等市场主体生产、经营活动涉及的各类犯罪案件。检察机关对于公司、企业涉侵犯知识产权犯罪，相关单位和个人认罪认罚，能够正常生产经营，承诺建立或者完善企业合规制度，符合启动企业合规建设条件的，应及时启动企业合规程序，积极适用第三方监督评估机制。充分发挥知识产权司法保护对创新发展的支撑和保护作用，通过开展企业合规建设，量身定制合规计划，督促企业完善知识产权保护等相关制度，提升企业自主创新能力。针对个案办理中反映的共性问题，会同相关部门推动行业合规建设，加强诉源治理。
(二)强化审查把关，对企业合规整改情况科学精准评估。本案中，检察机关加强与第三方监督评估机制管理委员会的协同联动，紧密结合涉案企业和侵犯知识产权犯罪特点，有针对性选择知识产权、工程机械等领域专家组成第三方监管组织。合规整改过程中，检察机关通过不定期走访企业，跟踪涉案企业合规建设情况。合规整改后，组织检察听证听取相关各方意见，加强对合规计划执行、第三方合规考察报告的审查把关，防止“虚假合规”“纸面合规”。最终，检察机关综合考量中某公司及刘某余等五人犯罪情节轻微，具有认罪认罚、赔偿谅解等情节，且中某公司经合规整改合格，依法作出不起诉决定。
案例七
马某等六人假冒注册商标、销售假冒注册商标的商品案
【关键词】
假冒注册商标罪 种业保护 诉源治理
【要旨】
种子是农业的“芯片”，是国家粮食安全的“命脉”。检察机关从国家种业安全和粮食安全大局出发，加大对种业领域假冒伪劣、套牌侵权等违法犯罪行为的惩治力度。依法告知权利人诉讼权利义务，为提起民事诉讼提供法律指引，推动惩罚性赔偿制度落实。结合办案提出社会治理类检察建议，促进诉源治理。
一、基本案情
“德美亚”是垦丰种业股份有限公司(以下简称垦丰种业公司)拥有的注册商标，核定使用商品为第31类植物种子等。2018年10月，马某、黄某发在甘肃省武威市和酒泉市购进61吨散装玉米种子并发往吉林省公主岭市，由马某完成精选、包衣后，再发往黑龙江省佳木斯市。期间，马某向杨某祝支付人民币10万元，用于在黑龙江省共青农场等地农户手中收购“德美亚 3号”玉米种子包装袋，同时教授杨某祝拆除包装方法，并强调不得损坏包装。杨某祝找到战某生帮忙，同时告知战某生上述事项。杨某祝共收购“德美亚 3号”玉米种子包装袋1106条，获利人民币1.8万元，其中约500条包装袋为战某生收购，战某生同时还帮助杨某祝拆除200条包装袋，共获利人民币1.7万元。黄某发取得包装袋后，未经垦丰种业公司授权许可，伙同陈某霞在佳木斯市雇佣人员进行灌装并对外销售。马某、黄某发、陈某霞共销售假冒“德美亚 3号”玉米种子2598袋，非法经营数额共计人民币187万余元。
2019年3月，李某向马某、黄某发购买假冒的“德美亚 3号”玉米种子并对外销售，销售金额人民币149万余元。
二、检察机关履职情况
2019年9月27日，黑龙江省垦区公安局宝泉岭分局以马某、黄某发、陈某霞、李某、杨某祝、战某生涉嫌假冒注册商标罪、销售假冒注册商标的商品罪向黑龙江省宝泉岭人民检察院(以下简称宝泉岭检察院)移送审查起诉。2020年3月9日，宝泉岭检察院以假冒注册商标罪、销售假冒注册商标的商品罪对马某等六人提起公诉。2021年3月22日，黑龙江省宝泉岭人民法院以假冒注册商标罪分别判处被告人马某、黄某发、陈某霞、杨某祝、战某生有期徒刑十个月至四年不等，并处罚金人民币一千元至十五万元不等；以销售假冒注册商标的商品罪判处被告人李某有期徒刑三年六个月，并处罚金人民币十五万元。各被告人均未提出上诉，判决已生效。
检察机关分析发现，种子经销商户违反种子法相关规定，未严格落实种子追溯制度，购进、销售种子时未建立经营档案，是导致案件发生的重要原因。宝泉岭检察院针对该问题向农业农村部门制发检察建议，督促行政机关严格落实种子追溯制度，建立经营档案。同时，向权利人提出重新设计涉案产品包装、加强技术防伪等建议，防止侵权风险。
为依法维护权利人合法权益，加大对侵权人的追责力度，推动惩罚性赔偿制度落实，黑龙江省检察院农垦分院告知垦丰种业公司有提起民事惩罚性赔偿之诉的权利，并在证据收集、法律适用等方面提供指引。2021年2月19日，垦丰种业公司向黑龙江省农垦中级法院提起民事惩罚性赔偿之诉，同年10月15日，法院一审认定垦丰种业公司损失人民币159万余元，并以此为基数，判决六名被告承担人民币300万元的惩罚性赔偿责任。六名被告均未上诉，判决已生效。
三、典型意义
(一)加强种业知识产权司法保护，筑牢国家粮食安全基石。近年来，我国种业市场秩序不断规范，但套牌侵权、假冒伪劣种子坑农害农现象仍屡禁不止，给国家农业生产、粮食安全带来隐患，损害了权利人合法权利，严重影响种业创新环境。黑龙江是农业大省，承担国家粮食安全“压舱石”的重任。农垦检察机关聚焦国家种业安全和粮食安全大局，对种业领域套牌侵权突出问题重拳出击，充分发挥刑事追诉和民事惩罚性赔偿制度的有力震慑作用，让侵权者付出沉重代价，全面提升种业知识产权司法保护水平，为民族种业发展、维护粮食安全营造良好的生态环境。
(二)积极开展诉源治理，促进行业监管和企业风险防范。检察机关在依法办案的同时，应当推动更多法治力量向源头端口前移，贯彻“既要抓末端、治已病，更要抓前端、治未病”的工作要求。对种子市场的治理，需要司法机关、行政管理机关共同努力、联动履职，保障市场经营规范有序。检察机关通过制发检察建议等方式，督促行政机关进一步加强监管，推动源头治理。同时，针对种子企业知识产权保护意识薄弱的问题，积极开展普法宣传活动、提出预防侵权法律建议，建立与种子企业常态化沟通机制，促进企业提升保护种业知识产权能力。
案例八
彭某雪、王某恒等七人假冒注册商标、销售假冒注册商标的商品、非法制造、销售非法制造的注册商标标识案
【关键词】
侵犯商标权犯罪 跨区域协作 全链条打击
【要旨】
检察机关在办理侵犯知识产权案件中，紧紧围绕贯彻落实国家区域发展战略部署，注重构建跨区域案件办理协作机制，创新履职模式，全链条打击上下游犯罪，形成知识产权保护检察合力。积极开展综合治理，服务优化营商环境，推动相关行业健康发展。
一、基本案情
重庆江小白酒业有限公司、四川古蔺郎酒厂有限公司、湖北劲牌有限公司分别系“江小白”“小郎酒”“劲酒”注册商标的商标权人。
2018年1月至2019年8月，彭某雪从四川省成都市购买大量假冒“江小白”“小郎酒”“劲酒”注册商标的白酒，并以低价对外销售，销售金额人民币40余万元。2019年9月起，彭某雪从成都市购买大量废弃“小郎酒”等品牌酒瓶，从山东省某包装公司订购含有“小郎酒”等注册商标标识的瓶盖和包装纸等材料。彭某雪还向袁某求购假冒“小郎酒”等注册商标标识的瓶盖，袁某将从王某恒处购得的假冒“小郎酒”商标标识瓶盖3万余个转卖给彭某雪。随后，彭某雪邀约李某勇共同出资扩建位于四川省雅安市的厂房，并雇请刘某洪等人在该厂房内生产、灌装假冒“小郎酒”等品牌白酒，向他人低价销售，销售金额人民币50万余元。
2018年1月至2020年12月，卫某波从彭某雪处购买假冒“江小白”“小郎酒”“劲酒”注册商标的白酒，加价销往重庆市和四川省等多地，销售金额人民币26万余元。2018年1月至2020年12月，胡某兵从卫某波处购买假冒“小郎酒”“江小白”注册商标的白酒，销售给重庆市云阳县多个乡镇副食店，销售金额人民币5万余元。
二、检察机关履职情况
2021年4月8日，重庆市云阳县公安局以彭某雪、李某勇等五人涉嫌假冒注册商标罪、销售假冒注册商标的商品罪向重庆市云阳县人民检察院(以下简称云阳县检察院)移送审查起诉。根据重庆市公安机关移送的线索，成都市公安机关，成都市公安机关抓获生产、销售假冒注册商标瓶盖的王某恒、袁某。云阳县检察院与四川天府新区成都片区人民检察院(以下简称天府新区检察院)加强协作，就同案犯供述、证人证言、电子数据等关键证据共通共享，协查取证，确定涉案瓶盖与上下游买卖关系的对应性，就侵权产品数量、犯罪金额等问题统一事实认定；就上下游犯罪人员的地位作用、量刑情节等问题加强沟通，确保法律适用和刑事政策协调一致，实现对侵权假冒产品生产源头和销售终端全链条打击。
2021年8月27日，云阳县检察院以被告人彭某雪犯假冒注册商标罪、销售假冒注册商标的商品罪，被告人李某勇、刘某洪犯假冒注册商标罪，被告人卫某波、胡某兵犯销售假冒注册商标的商品罪提起公诉。2021年12月9日，重庆市云阳县人民法院以假冒注册商标罪、销售假冒注册商标的商品罪判处被告人彭某雪有期徒刑四年六个月，并处罚金人民币十五万元；以假冒注册商标罪、销售假冒注册商标的商品罪分别判处被告人李某勇、刘某洪、卫某波、胡某兵有期徒刑一年至三年不等，并处罚金人民币一万元至五万元不等，部分人员适用缓刑。五名被告人均未提出上诉，判决已生效。
2021年9月18日，天府新区检察院以非法制造、销售非法制造的注册商标标识罪对被告人王某恒、袁某提起公诉。2021年12月15日，四川天府新区成都片区人民法院以非法制造、销售非法制造的注册商标标识罪分别判处被告人王某恒、袁某有期徒刑一年六个月和一年五个月，均并处罚金人民币二万五千元。二名被告人均未提出上诉，判决已生效。
三、典型意义
(一)加强跨区域检察协作，协同打击侵犯知识产权犯罪。针对侵犯知识产权犯罪跨区域、链条化、产业化的特点，为更好服务保障成渝地区双城经济圈建设，重庆、四川检察机签署多份协作意见，重点推进完善跨区域知识产权快速协作保护机制。本案中，重庆、四川检察机关依托上述机制，强化两地检察办案协作，就案件协查取证、信息资源和证据共享方面积极衔接，引导侦查机关深挖制假链条，从生产源头到销售终端，全链条打击侵犯知识产权犯罪，确保法律适用和刑事政策协调一致，形成知识产权保护检察合力。
(二)积极开展源头治理，以检察服务优化营商环境。该案权利人为重庆、四川等地知名白酒企业。检察机关在办案中发现，多起案件假酒来源于白酒原酒重要产区四川省邛崃市。成都市检察机关就原酒基酒易被灌装后假冒名酒以及白酒行业知识产权保护等问题走访邛崃市工商联、邛崃市酿酒协会以及本土白酒企业，了解企业在商标保护方面存在的问题和诉求，就加强商标保护、地理标志保护等听取意见，从服务保障创新、企业合规建设等多维度提出具体建议和改进举措。重庆、成都检察机关组织开展白酒商标品牌保护讲座，共同推动区域白酒品牌建设，护航川渝地区白酒行业有序发展。
案例九
广州指某服务有限公司、广州中某管理咨询服务有限公司与迅某商贸有限公司等侵害商标权抗诉案
【关键词】
侵害商标权 商标权无效 溯及力 恶意注册
【要旨】
恶意取得商标注册并利用注册商标谋取不正当利益的行为，明显违反公平原则和诚实信用原则，不受法律保护。检察机关在监督中应当注重对关联案件和类案的检索，尤其应注重对指导性案例和典型案例的检索，提升监督质效。
一、基本案情
广州指某服务有限公司(以下简称指某公司)、广州中某管理咨询服务有限公司(以下简称中某公司)享有第10619071号“”注册商标专用权，该商标核定使用商品为第25类服装等。2014年1月，指某公司、中某公司发现迅某商贸有限公司(以下简称迅某公司)及其深圳花园城商业中心店(以下简称花园城店)将“”字样标识用于羽绒服的吊牌、收纳袋、互联网广告、展架装潢上，并被突出使用。指某公司、中某公司以被控侵权标识与注册商标易造成混淆误认，构成对指某公司、中某公司注册商标专用权的侵害为由，向深圳市南山区人民法院提起诉讼。
深圳市南山区人民法院一审认为：迅某公司及花园城店使用被控侵权标识的行为构成商标侵权，判决迅某公司、花园城店停止侵害，赔偿指某公司、中某公司包括维权合理开支在内的经济损失人民币5万元，驳回其他诉讼请求。迅某公司、花园城店上诉至深圳市中级人民法院，二审判决驳回上诉，维持原判。迅某公司、花园城店申请再审，广东省高级人民法院指令深圳市中级人民法院再审。深圳市中级人民法院再审认为，现无证据证明指某公司、中某公司已将注册商标投入实际使用并因被控侵权行为造成经济利益上的减损，改判迅某公司及花园城店除停止侵害外，向指某公司、中某公司支付维权开支人民币13999元。
迅某公司、花园城店不服再审判决，向广东省深圳市人民检察院申请监督，该院审查后作出不支持监督申请决定。迅某公司、花园城店不服该不支持监督申请决定，向广东省人民检察院(以下简称广东省检察院)申请复查。
二、检察机关履职情况
广东省检察院全面调查核实，通过调阅深圳市人民检察院相关案件材料、对关联案件进行大数据检索，并向关联案件受理法院核实情况等方式，补充查明两项事实。一是本案及相关案件的裁判情况。指某公司、中某公司于2014年以涉案注册商标享有专用权为由，以相同诉讼请求在北京、上海、广东、浙江四地针对迅某公司及其下属各门店或其关联公司提起42件商标侵权诉讼。迅某公司对深圳发生的3件案件已向广东省检察院申请复查，本案即为其中之一。至广东省检察院复查期间，已有12件案件被最高人民法院再审改判，认定不构成商标侵权。2015年，指某公司、中某公司在广州、中山、北京三地起诉的15件案件，法院生效判决也均认定不构成商标侵权。指某公司、中某公司在深圳、佛山、东莞三地起诉的8件案件，至广东省检察院复查期间，均由广东省高级人民法院以原民事判决确有错误为由自行启动再审程序。指某公司、中某公司在深圳另外起诉的7件案件中有4件撤诉，另外3件即为广东省检察院办理的复查案件。二是涉案注册商标的权利状态。2018年8月，原国家工商行政管理总局商标局发布第1610期商标公告，第10619071号注册商标在全部商品上宣告无效。
检察机关审查认为，本案争议焦点在于涉案注册商标在被宣告无效前的权利保护。中某公司、指某公司超出经营范围，不以使用为目的且无合理或正当理由申请注册并囤积大量商标，在网上公开出售包括涉案注册商标在内的商标牟利。指某公司、中某公司在向迅某公司提出高价转让涉案注册商标未果后，在全国范围内以基本相同的事实提起大量诉讼，主观恶意明显，其行为违反诚实信用原则。中某公司、指某公司借用司法资源以商标权谋取不正当利益的行为，不应当获得保护。
2020年4月13日，广东省检察院向广东省高级人民法院提出抗诉。2021年2月1日，广东省高级人民法院作出判决，认为指某公司和中某公司不仅存在此前三年未实际使用涉案注册商标的事实，且在商标的注册和使用过程中违反诚实信用原则，主观恶意明显。深圳市中级人民法院在涉案注册商标无效之前已经作出判令迅某公司、花园城店连带赔偿维权合理开支损失的再审判决，且已经执行完毕。但如将该维权合理开支损失判定由迅某公司和花园城店承担，既损害迅某公司和花园城店合法权益，明显违反公平原则，又有违人民法院维护诚实信用民法原则、反对不正当注册和使用商标行为的司法态度。广东省高级人民法院判决撤销深圳市中级人民法院判决。广东省检察院同时启动抗诉程序的另外两件案件，也同期被广东省高级人民法院改判，该系列案件得到整体改判。
三、典型意义
(一)恶意取得商标注册并利用注册商标谋取不正当利益的行为，不受法律保护。商标法第四十七条第二款规定，注册商标无效的决定或者裁定不具有追溯力，但第四十七条第二款同时规定“因商标注册人的恶意给他人造成的损失，应当给予赔偿”。第四十七条第三款规定“依照前款规定不返还商标侵权赔偿金、商标转让费、商标使用费明显违反公平原则的，应当全部或者部分返还”。该规定明确了上述“不具有追溯力”原则的例外情形。因此，恶意取得商标注册并利用商标谋取不正当利益的行为不受法律保护，这也是商标法第七条诚实信用原则在具体案件中的适用。检察机关在处理商标侵权案件时，应注意审查注册商标权利人是否存在恶意注册并谋取不正当利益的行为。本案对遏制利用恶意注册商标进行恶意诉讼的行为发挥了积极的导向作用。
(二)注重关联案件和类案检索，提升监督质效。本案是通过上级检察机关的民事复查监督程序发现下级检察机关监督不到位的案件。检察机关在监督中，主动通过关联案件和类案检索发现最高人民法院在2018年已对指某公司、中某公司起诉的部分案件进行了再审改判，相关案件被评为最高人民法院知识产权年度典型案例。在最高人民法院上述再审判决形成前，指某公司、中某公司2015年后提起诉讼的多件案件，均被法院生效判决认定不构成商标侵权。因此，检察机关在监督中应当注重对关联案件和类案的检索，尤其应注重对指导性案例和典型案例的检索，准确适用法律，提升监督质效。
案例十
陈某与佛山市亮某厨卫有限公司侵害专利权纠纷再审检察建议案
【关键词】
不视为侵犯专利权 依职权启动监督 再审检察建议
【要旨】
除当事人申请监督外，依职权启动监督也是民事诉讼监督案件的重要来源。在专利侵权纠纷案件中，专利产品系由专利权人或者经其许可的单位、个人售出后，使用、许诺销售、销售、进口该产品的，不视为侵犯专利权。
一、案件事实
佛山市荣某厨卫有限公司(以下简称荣某公司)股东梁某是ZL201030263816.6“水槽(5)”外观设计的专利权人。2013年2月，梁某将涉案专利排他许可陈某实施，并约定陈某有权作为诉讼主体对侵权人进行起诉。2015年4月，陈某从佛山市亮某厨卫有限公司(以下简称亮某公司)处购买涉案水槽产品。后陈某以亮某公司侵害专利权为由，向广州知识产权法院提起诉讼。
广州知识产权法院一审认为，亮某公司未经陈某许可，为生产经营目的，制造、销售、许诺销售涉案专利产品，侵害了陈某享有的专利权，依法应当承担停止侵害及赔偿损失等民事责任。本案在诉讼中，法院向亮某公司工商登记地址邮寄送达未能成功后，采用公告送达的方式，进行缺席审判。至2018年7月，亮某公司收到法院执行通知书才获悉判决结果。2018年8月，亮某公司向广东省高级人民法院申请再审，法院认为亮某公司的再审申请已经超过民事诉讼法第二百零五条规定的申请再审期限，裁定驳回亮某公司的再审申请。之后，亮某公司向广东省人民检察院申请监督。
二、检察机关履职情况
广东省人民检察院于2019年1月16日将该案交广东省人民检察院广州铁路运输分院(以下简称广铁检察分院)审查，广铁检察分院重点开展以下工作：
一是主动依职权启动监督。亮某公司向检察机关申请监督时，当时实施的《人民检察院民事诉讼监督规则(试行)》第三十一条第一款规定，当事人申请再审超过法律规定的期限，人民检察院不予受理。检察机关考虑本案判决存在确有错误的可能，且法院在向亮某公司工商登记地址邮寄送达未能成功后，未再通过陈某提交证据材料中亮某公司的联系方式进行送达，导致亮某公司无法参加诉讼并进行答辩。基于上述原因，依据保护民营经济的司法政策，检察机关主动依职权启动对该案的监督。
二是认真开展调查核实工作。亮某公司提供证据证明其直接向荣某公司购买涉案产品后再转售给陈某。但为进一步查明事实，广铁检察分院调查核实了2014年至2018年间亮某公司与荣某公司之间交易往来的情况，同时对本案关键证人即涉案产品专利权人梁某及荣某公司客户联系人姜某英等进行询问，并补充调查了亮某公司成立至今的住所地及实际经营地等情况。姜某英关于亮某公司与荣某公司的购销关系、双方的交易习惯等陈述，与亮某公司所提交的证据内容相互印证。同时姜某英还确认了亮某公司与荣某公司签订的涉案《水槽订购合同书》、订购单等证据的真实性。上述调查核实工作为检察机关依法提出再审检察建议提供了充分依据。
广铁检察分院认为本案有新的证据证明涉案产品系亮某公司直接向荣某公司购买后再转售给陈某，依据2008年修正的专利法第六十九条的规定，亮某公司从正规合法渠道以正常合理价格直接向荣某公司采购涉案产品，再销售给陈某，不视为侵犯专利权。
2019年9月10日，广铁检察分院向广州知识产权法院发出再审检察建议。广州知识产权法院依法启动再审程序并于2021年6月28日作出判决，认定亮某公司的涉案行为未侵害陈某的专利权，原审判决认定事实和适用法律错误，判决撤销原审判决并驳回陈某的全部诉讼请求。
三、典型意义
(一)在专利侵权纠纷案件中，应注意审查是否存在不视为侵权的情形。专利权作为国家通过法律形式赋予专利权人的一种专有权，专利权人可以在一定期限内自己独占实施专利及排除他人未经授权实施专利。但在赋予专利权人专有权的同时，出于公共利益的考虑，专利权行使也被附加限制。现行专利法第七十五条规定了五种不视为侵犯专利权的情形，如权利用尽抗辩、先用权抗辩、临时过境抗辩等。在办理专利侵权纠纷案件中，检察机关应注意审查是否存在法定的不视为侵权的情形。
(二)充分认识检察机关依职权进行监督的必要性，对确有必要进行监督的案件应依职权启动监督程序。检察机关积极构建知识产权民事诉讼多元化监督格局，综合运用多种监督手段实行有效监督。除当事人申请监督外，依职权启动监督也是民事诉讼监督案件重要来源。检察机关应按照《人民检察院民事诉讼监督规则》第三十七条的规定，对影响当事人实体权利等确有必要进行监督的案件，可依职权启动监督程序，纠正错误判决，有效保护当事人的合法权益，维护司法公正和司法权威。
案例十一
王某与某银行股份有限公司义乌篁园支行侵害著作权纠纷抗诉案
【关键词】
著作权侵权 民间艺术作品 独创性
【要旨】
涉及民间艺术作品独创性的判断，要全面分析在案证据，依法保护民间艺术作品著作权人的合法权利。当事人提交的著作权登记证书、创作过程及公开发表证明等，在无相反证据的情形下，可以作为判断著作权权利人的证据。
一、基本案情
2012年3月，王某以著作权权利人的身份向浙江省版权局申请对剪纸图案“剪纸-《大福狗》”进行作品登记。2018年，王某发现某银行股份有限公司义乌篁园支行(以下简称篁园支行)在营业场所门窗外张贴多幅新春贴纸，其上有福狗剪纸图案。王某认为该图案侵犯了“剪纸-《大福狗》”的著作权，于2018年3月26日向浙江省义乌市人民法院起诉。
浙江省义乌市人民法院一审认为，著作权法保护的作品应具有独创性。篁园支行举证证明在王某涉案剪纸作品登记之前，他人已于2007年将“狗的剪纸图片”上传到网络，该图案与涉案作品同为剪纸图案，在整体构图、线条与表达等方面高度一致。王某未能举证证明在“狗的剪纸图片”上传前，其已将涉案作品“剪纸-《大福狗》”公开发表。涉案作品相比于在先作品不具有独创性，判决驳回王某的诉讼请求。王某不服，上诉至浙江省金华市中级人民法院。二审判决驳回上诉，维持原判。王某申请再审，浙江省高级人民法院裁定驳回其再审申请。之后，王某向浙江省金华市人民检察院(以下简称金华市检察院)申请监督。
二、检察机关履职情况
检察机关受理该案后，重点开展以下工作：
一是补充查明案件事实。2020年9月30日，最高人民法院作出(2020)最高法民再243号民事判决(以下简称第243号判决)。该案查明：2006年2月，孙某在网站上已发布福狗图片，该图片与涉案作品“剪纸-《大福狗》”基本相同，且孙某出具说明证明该图片系来源于网络，并非其本人原创。《中国剪纸艺术人名大典》(2007年10月第1版)中登载了涉案作品“剪纸-《大福狗》”。第243号判决认定王某提交的著作权登记证书、电子创作稿、2005年中国义乌国际小商品博览会的材料以及公开出版物等证据，在没有相反证据的情况下，可以证明王某享有涉案作品“剪纸-《大福狗》”的著作权。
二是全面搜索查找关联案件。检察机关通过浙江裁判文书检索系统和中国裁判文书网搜索发现，除本案外，王某就涉案作品向多家法院起诉银行。其中一案法院虽已判决驳回王某的诉讼请求，但在第243号判决作出后，法院又认为有新证据推翻原判决，已启动再审程序。
2021年4月25日，金华市检察院向浙江省人民检察院提请抗诉。检察机关认为，在篁园支行提出反证的2007年“狗的剪纸图片”上传到网络之前，涉案作品相关图案已于2006年在网络上传播。王某提供的著作权登记证书、创作过程文件、参展2005年博览会等证据能够形成完整的证据链，证明王某系涉案作品的著作权人。在篁园支行未提交相反证据的情形下，王某对涉案作品主张著作权应予以支持。
2021年5月19日，浙江省人民检察院向浙江省高级人民法院提出抗诉。2021年6月11日，浙江省高级人民法院作出裁定，指令金华市中级人民法院再审本案。2021年12月10日，金华市中级人民法院作出判决，认定王某享有涉案作品的著作权，篁园支行使用的侵权产品与王某享有著作权的“剪纸-《大福狗》”作品实质性相似，构成侵权。判决撤销一、二审判决，篁园支行赔偿王某经济损失及合理费用人民币1500元。
三、典型意义
(一)强化证据调查核实，坚持精准监督。相比小说、歌曲等具有明显原创特点的文学艺术作品，剪纸作品等民间艺术作品的独创性证明难度较高。特别是创作时间较早、广泛传播的作品，创作者知识产权认知和证据留存意识还不强，独创性证明难度更大。在案件办理中，涉及独创性的判断，要全面分析在案证据，综合当事人提供的著作权登记证书、创作过程及公开发表证明等证据，对证据能否形成高度盖然性进行判断，依法维护著作权人的合法权利。
(2) Pay attention to grasping the propaganda nodes and promote the judicial protection of traditional culture.
Paper-cutting is a popular folk art that is widely used in traditional festivals and festivals. This case involves copyright protection of folk art works. The procuratorial organ has a keen insight into the value of law popularization contained in the successful handling of this case, and actively carries out law popularization work such as case-based explanations.
Through a number of media, at key milestones such as World Intellectual Property Day and the eve of the New Year's Day and the Spring Festival, we publicized the handling of the case, and reminded the copyright owner to pay attention to retaining the creative materials.
Through vigorous and timely publicity, the effectiveness of case handling and the public awareness of intellectual property protection will be further improved, and the social influence of intellectual property inspection work will be expanded.