For example, the case of the self-media "Cold Play Lab" infringing on "Baidu's reputation rights" has been pronounced recently. The Beijing Haidian District People's Court ruled that the self-media "Cool Play Lab" must compensate Baidu. 140,000. And he needs to continue to publicly apologize in the main text of his WeChat public account.

For most self-media, a one-time payment of 140,000 yuan in cash is a considerable amount.

3. How can self-media avoid this big pit?

1

1. “iQiyi” sued “Marketing Wonders”

In October 2018, iQiyi sued the video program “Marketing Wonders” ” and the main company “Beijing Xueling Network Technology Co., Ltd.” that created the “Marketing Qi Pa Shuo” WeChat public account.

It was claimed that Xueling Company was seeking to gain popularity from the program "Qi Pa Shuo" and asked it to stop using the words "Qi Pa Shuo" and demanded a compensation of 2 million yuan.

For most self-media companies, 666,000 yuan is basically an astronomical sum, or at least a huge fine.

Why did the court rule this way?

Because iQiyi has obtained the license to use the "Qi Pa Shuo" trademark No. 16260183, it enjoys the exclusive right to register the trademark "Qi Pa Shuo".

The majority of self-media people must check whether their official account name/LOGO/company name, etc. are the same as those of others.

2. "Kuaishou" sued "Baidu"

On January 4, according to the announcement on the Haidian Court website.

Beijing Dajia Internet Information Technology Co., Ltd. , Beijing Kuaishou Technology Co., Ltd. cited trademark infringement and unfair competition disputes

Shenzhen Mabang Network Co., Ltd., Beijing Baidu Netcom Technology Co., Ltd., and Yulong Computer Communication Technology (Shenzhen). Co., Ltd. filed a lawsuit in court.

Plaintiffs Dajia Company and Kuaishou Company claimed that Dajia Company was the right holder of the “Kuaiying” trademark and later authorized the use of the “Kuaishou” trademark to Kuaishou Company. They found that a photography app "Kuaishou Kuaiying" developed and operated by Shenzhen Mabang Company was promoted in the "Baidu Mobile Assistant Platform" operated by Baidu Company and the "Coolpad Application Market" operated by Yulong Company. /p>

Judging from the icon, Shenzhen Mabang Company’s APP is exactly the same as their APP icon, and its name is “Kuaishou Kuaiying”, which infringes upon the exclusive rights of trademarks registered by Dajia Company and Kuaishou Company, and is also Unfair competition.

Shenzhen Mabang Company should bear corresponding civil liability. Baidu Company and Yulong Company respectively launched the "Kuaishou Kuaiying" APP in their mobile application platforms, so they should also bear it. Bear corresponding civil liability.

Currently, this case is under further review.

I think Baidu is a bit shot this time.

At the same time, we should note that if your APP name partially overlaps with the name of another person's APP, and someone else has registered a trademark of that name, it may also be suspected of trademark infringement.

3. "Tencent" sues "WeChat Food Company".

On December 14, 2018, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court publicly pronounced its verdict on a case involving infringement of “WeChat” trademark rights and unfair competition.

The first instance found that “WeChat” was well-known. trademark, WeChat Food Company was ordered to stop using the company name, promptly change its name, and compensate Tencent for more than 10 million yuan.

The court found that WeChat Food Company was established after the two well-known trademarks involved in the case had become quite famous, and would be The company involved in the case registered and used the prominently identified part "WeChat" in the table above as the main part of the company's trade name, which could easily confuse the relevant public about the source of the goods or services and violated the principle of good faith.

The whole story. This is the case.

Someone registered the WeChat trademark for food and transferred the trademark to WeChat Food Company.

But in addition to the WeChat trademark, this person has also registered more than 300 trademarks, such as "Kachia", "AMIGAA", "COACH TORP", "Jie Yiya", "Xixili" "Well-known trademarks of this type.

Violated the principle of good faith and "obtained registration by other unfair means" as specified in Article 41, Paragraph 1 of the Trademark Law.

Therefore, the food WeChat trademark was ruled invalid, which infringed on Tencent WeChat’s trademark rights.

2

Defamation and infringement of reputation rights

“Youku” sued the self-media “Cow Whipper”

On the evening of January 9, The self-media "BiaNews" published an article on its official website, "It is reported that Toutiao has reached an agreement to acquire Youku."

The article stated that insiders revealed that Toutiao has reached an acquisition of Youku and is in the process of docking business with Xigua Video.

On January 10, Youku announced that it would sue the online self-media "BiaNews" for spreading false information.

"BiaNews" has infringed on Youku's goodwill and is seeking compensation of 10 million from Youku, and requires the other party to publicly apologize through official channels to eliminate the negative impact caused by its dissemination of false information.

There are two key points here:

First, there was no confirmation from both Youku and Toutiao

Second, after Youku publicly disclosed the rumor, it still failed to correct it in time. Delete relevant false information

"BiaNews" is a well-known self-media in the field of technology. Logically speaking, the "grapevine information" obtained by insiders has a certain degree of credibility. However, this time Youku went all out to sue, and it seems that this insider's "grapevine information" is 100% false.

3

1. "iQiyi" sued "Today's Toutiao"

According to the judgment, iQiyi enjoyed the rights to the TV series "Old Nine Gates" Exclusive rights to disseminate information online, and some Toutiao accounts uploaded part of the drama's episode content and used titles such as "Preview" to attract traffic, so "iQiyi" transferred the operator of Toutiao to "ByteDance" He went to court and demanded compensation of 1 million yuan.

2. “Douyin” sued “Houpai Short Video” owned by “Baidu”

Baidu stated in court that Douyin short videos do not have their own independent expression of ideas and do not have Originality does not constitute a work and should not be protected by copyright law.

On December 26, 2018, the Beijing Internet Court officially pronounced its verdict on the case of “Douyin Short Video” suing Baidu’s “Huopai Video” for infringing the right to disseminate information network.

①The 15-second short video of Douyin involved in the case is a "quasi-electrical work" and is protected by copyright law

③The first instance rejected Douyin's lawsuit

4

1. “Baidu” sued the self-media “Cool Play Lab”

In August 2018, the self-media “Cool Play Lab” published a number of articles related to Baidu. Baidu took it to court and claimed 5 million. This incident caused a sensation in the self-media circle.

Xiao Gongju observed that several articles from Coldplay Lab mostly complained about Baidu through some derogatory words, rather than Baidu’s own products.

In my opinion: You can complain about a bad product with good reason, but saying a company is bad involves reputational rights. We cannot be black for the sake of so-called political correctness on the Internet, or for the sake of being black.

The Beijing Haidian District People's Court ruled that the relevant actions of "Cool Play Lab" and its operating entity "Beijing Quzhi Alpha Technology Co., Ltd." have constituted an infringement of Baidu's reputation rights.

The self-media "Cold Play Lab" needs to compensate Baidu for economic losses and reasonable expenses totaling 140,000 yuan, and continue to publicly apologize in the main text of its WeChat public account.

As of now, the self-media "Coldplay Lab" has not published an apology article on its official account.

3. "Douyin" sued "Baidu"

On December 3, 2018, Haidian Court Network reported that "Entertainment is not stupid music" was published on the Baijiahao platform An article titled "Douyin's "Slide Gate" reappears, a man and a woman interact in the water in an amusement park, netizens: moral decay", fabricating the existence of a so-called "Slide Gate" pornographic video in a short video on Douyin.

4. “Douyin” sued “Sina”

Because it was believed that Weibo accounts such as “Toutiao News” continued to publish “Couples Get 3 for Douyin Films” on the Weibo platform Buy a car with 80,000 mahjong tiles! "Assaulted by Salespeople" content.

Beijing Weibo Vision Technology Co., Ltd. (the main company of Douyin) sued Beijing Sina Internet Information Services Co., Ltd. and publishing platform Beijing Weimeng Chuangke Network Technology Co., Ltd. to the court for infringement of reputation rights. .

From the above cases, we will find that civil disputes have arisen between Toutiao and many Internet giants such as iQiyi, Baidu, and Sina.

5

On December 27, 2018, the People's Court of Haidian District, Beijing issued the "First Instance Civil Judgment on the Image Rights Dispute between Ge You and Taixin Fund Management Co., Ltd."

Taixin Fund was sued by Ge You in court for using the "Ge You Lying Emoticon Pack" on its public account.

For this WeChat article with 23 clicks and 1 like, the court ordered a compensation of 9,500 yuan, with an average cost of 413 yuan per click, which is considered a sky-high click price in the self-media industry.

The whole story is this.

Taixin Fund published an article with pictures "If Uncle Ge also trades in stocks...". The article also contains several slogans: "I have expected this wave of market trends", "This is definitely a big stock market." Bull stock", "I want to cover my position, don't stop me", "I regret not buying this stock"...

Ge You believes:

Taixin Fund A large number of advertisements were embedded in his portrait, which were closely related to the business of Taixin Fund. The advertising slogan made the public account mistakenly believe that Ge You was a corporate user of Taixin Fund, which infringed the right of portrait and required compensation for a total of 310,000 related losses. fee.

Taixin Fund believes:

The WeChat article has very little influence, with only 23 views, including those viewed by company employees, and it was deleted in time. Ge You's demand for compensation was too high and had no legal basis, so he disagreed with the lawsuit.

In the end, the court held that:

② However, Ge You did not submit evidence to prove the property losses caused by the infringement of personal rights or the benefits obtained by Taixin Fund

③ Considering that "Ge You Lie" was a hot topic in society when the article was pushed, Taixin Fund's behavioral intention was more focused on hot topics, keeping the form of the article pushed by the official account interesting and lively, and the official account push timely

④ Judging from the content of the article and the picture itself containing Ge You’s portrait, the general public does not think that Taixin Fund uses Ge You’s popularity to advertise its business operations, nor does it regard Ge You as a business partner of Taixin Fund. Spokesperson

In the end, there is no need to pay compensation of 300,000 yuan. Only compensation of less than 10,000 yuan is required. The official account needs to publish an article to apologize.

1. Do not use celebrity portraits for commercial promotion without authorization

2. Produce and publish audio and video programs whose names may infringe on other people’s trademark rights

3. If the official account name is consistent/partially consistent with someone else’s registered trademark, it will be suspected of infringing on someone else’s trademark rights

5. Do not publish unverified information on self-media at will

6. We media should not use articles to slander or insult other people or companies

The copyright of this article belongs to the author.