During the trial, Juli company argued that it was a reasonable use to present the football events involved in the program in the form of a background screen.
Xinhua News Agency, Shanghai, April 8th (reporter Lan Tianming, Zhu Di) shanghai Pudong New Area People’s Court made a first-instance judgment on the case of CCTV International Network Co., Ltd. v. Shanghai Juli Media Technology Co., Ltd. copyright infringements and unfair competition on the 8th, juli company compensates CCTV international company for 2 million yuan and 150000 yuan for reasonable expenses for safeguarding rights.
Four guests, a table, a background screen…… Previously, on the website of “PPTV cohesion” of cohesion company, the studio specially set up for the 2016 European Championship was completed in this way. During the live broadcast, the background screen will broadcast live pictures of the competition from CCTV sports channel in real time. Before the program starts, during the half-time break and after the competition ends, other contents such as technical statistics and commercial advertisements are displayed.
CCTV International believes that it is authorized to enjoy the exclusive right to play the TV show of the European Championship online through the information network in mainland China. Without authorization, the defendant provided the public with the online real-time broadcasting service of the two matches in the above-mentioned way, and set up a special page on the homepage of the website to recommend the sued infringing works, this not only seriously infringes the plaintiff’s rights to the football match programs involved in the case, but also diverts the user traffic originally belonging to the plaintiff’s website, which constitutes unfair competition. Therefore, the plaintiff claimed a compensation of 3 million yuan in total for economic losses and reasonable expenses for safeguarding rights.
In the trial, Juli company argued that it was a reasonable use to present the program of the football match involved in the program in the form of a background screen. At the same time, it does not constitute unfair competition for the plaintiff, because the website program mainly focuses on guessing and answering questions, which is different from the plaintiff’s audience and communication channels and will not bring losses to the plaintiff.
According to the court’s determination, the football events involved in the case pass the setting of seats, the capture, switching and connection of shots, the playback of slow motion, the shaping of stories, etc, it fully reflects the creator’s selection, editing and processing of continuous pictures under the control of his will, highlights the personality factors in the process of program production, and belongs to the “original expression” in the field of literature and art “, and it meets the requirements of fixity, and can be protected as a kind of film works stipulated by copyright law.
The Court held that, in combination with the commercial advertisement of the defendant’s program, the background large screen was in the center of the picture and the area exceeded one third of the whole picture, and it would substantially replace the plaintiff to provide the public with comprehensive judgments such as the program of football events involved in the case, the defendant’s behavior is not a reasonable use, which infringes the plaintiff’s “other rights” to the programs involved “.
As for the amount of compensation, considering that the existing evidence shows that the actual loss or infringement profit obviously exceeds the legal maximum compensation limit, the Court comprehensively considers that the events involved in the case have higher popularity and commercial value, the defendant has the intention of infringement, the program complained of infringement has commercial advertisements, the amount of relevant license fees of the plaintiff, etc., and the amount of compensation is determined to be 2 million yuan above the statutory compensation limit, and fully support the reasonable expenditure of 150000 yuan for safeguarding rights claimed by the plaintiff.
Relevant insiders said that China’s sports event industry has developed rapidly in recent years. In the field of intellectual property protection, whether sports event programs constitute works in the sense of copyright law, whether the judgment standard of continuous pictures constitutes works is “high and low” or “with or without” is still to be clarified in theory and practice.
The relevant person in charge of Shanghai Pudong New Area People’s Court believes that under this background, the judgment of this case has made active attempts in exploring the protection path of sports events programs and maintaining the sustainable development of the industry at the judicial level. For the object or object usage which is really necessary for protection and is conducive to industrial development, the People’s Court can use the copyright law and other legal provisions and discretion standards to protect according to the most similar types of works or the use of bottom-notch rights, so as to protect the development and expansion of emerging industries.