Recently, our firm won the second instance of an administrative lawsuit on invalidation declaration of a patent for invention, successfully having the patent fully invalidated by th...
Recently, our firm won the first instance of an administrative litigation case for invalidation of an invention patent, in which it is ruled that the invention patent should be comp...
Supreme Court’s Determination on Protection Scope and Commercial Use of Layout Designs
Recently, The Intellectual Property Court of the SPC concluded an appeal case involving infringement of integrated circuit layout design rights. The case addressed whether a layout design without active components qualifies as a protected subject under layout design rights and the determination of commercial use of the layout design.
A technology company filed a lawsuit, claiming that the layout design of the accused infringing chip was identical to their registered layout design after comparison. They requested the court to order the other party to cease the infringement immediately, destroy the infringing products, and compensate RMB 20 million for economic losses.
The defendant, an electronics company, argued in the first instance that the plaintiff's layout design rights did not comply with the relevant provisions of the Regulations on the Protection of Integrated Circuit Layout Designs (hereinafter referred to as the Layout Design Regulations) and should be revoked.
The first-instance court held that to determine whether the accused actions constituted infringement, the protection scope of the registered layout design must first be confirmed. A protected layout design must be a three-dimensional layout by components and interconnections, with at least one active component. The plaintiff’s registered layout design did not contain any active components, thus failing to meet the basic definition of a layout design. Although the plaintiff's layout design had been granted exclusive rights and was still valid, it did not form a three-dimensional layout of components and interconnections for executing an electronic function and therefore could not be protected under layout design rights. The court dismissed the plaintiff's claims.
Later, the plaintiff appealed against the decision.
The Supreme People’s Court ruled that although the plaintiff’s 12-layer layout design did not contain active components, it demonstrated the three-dimensional configuration relationship between active components and interconnections, clearly defining their interfaces. Using standardized components from a wafer factory, the registered layout design could achieve the corresponding circuit functions. Therefore, the layout design could be considered a three-dimensional configuration of at least two components, one of which is active, and their interconnections.
Additionally, Article 17 of the Regulations on the Protection of Integrated Circuit Layout Designs stipulates: “If a layout design is not registered with the intellectual property administrative department of the State Council within two years from the date of its first commercial use anywhere in the world, the intellectual property administrative department of the State Council will not accept the registration.” In this case, the plaintiff continuously commissioned a company to manufacture chips incorporating registered layout design from March 24, 2014, to October 13, 2015. The frequency and quantity of commissions significantly exceeded the necessary running for tape-out, indicating that the layout design had been put into commercial use before October 24, 2015, which caused a severe defect in the registered layout design, it could not be protected in this case.
Consequently, the Supreme People’s Court dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal. (February 19, 2025, Intellectual Property Tribunal of the Supreme People’s Court)
Copyright
Coffee Shop Fined Millions for Using Classic IP Without Authorization
Recently, an Ultraman-themed coffee shop in Suzhou, Jiangsu province of China was sued by the licensee of the Ultraman series’ artistic images and elements for copyright infringement and unfair competition. The plaintiff demanded the cessation of the infringing activities and compensation of RMB 1 million for reasonable expenses and economic losses.
The Suzhou Huqiu District Court found that the defendant coffee shop, without authorization, used Ultraman images as large background walls in its physical store, displayed numerous Ultraman and monster figurines, models, cards, card albums, and badges, some of which were priced for sale. The shop also printed Ultraman images on takeaway cups and used Ultraman images in its ordering program, infringing the plaintiff's rights of exhibition, reproduction, distribution, and information network dissemination. Additionally, the coffee shop played the theme song “Miracle Reappearance” from the Ultraman series as background music, and its products, door handles, glass cups, and mini-program all featured Ultraman elements, misleading consumers into believing that the products were associated with Ultraman or that the shop was an authorized Ultraman-themed store. The court ruled that these actions constituted unfair competition by intentionally exploiting the plaintiff’s reputation and disrupting market order.
Although the coffee shop had ceased the infringing activities, it was still required to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses and reasonable expenses incurred in stopping the infringement. Considering the popularity of the plaintiff’s works and the legitimate licensing fees, as well as the defendant’s infringing actions, duration, and subjective fault, the court ordered the coffee shop to pay RMB 400,000 in damages and reasonable expenses.
The coffee shop appealed to the Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court but later withdrew the appeal, making the first-instance judgment final.
The judge also noted that classic IP images like Ultraman are considered artistic works under copyright law. Commercial use of these images, whether by reproducing them on physical materials or providing them to the public via the internet, is controlled by exclusive rights and requires prior authorization from the copyright holder. Even if the models and figurines were legally purchased, their public display for commercial purposes to attract customers exceeds the scope of statutory licenses and fair use under copyright law. (February 21, 2025, Jiangsu High People’s Court)
Pokémon Copyright Infringement Case Reached Settlement
Recently, the Guangdong High People’s Court successfully mediated an appeal case involving copyright infringement and unfair competition between the popular game “Pokémon” and the mobile game “Pocket Monsters: Replica.”
The defendant company publicly issued an apology, stating that it “will no longer infringe intellectual property rights related to the Pokémon game and its rights holders.” The terms of the settlement have been fully implemented.
Since July 2015, a Guangzhou-based network company had been operating the mobile game “Pocket Monsters: Replica,” which extensively used design elements from the Japanese company Pokémon’s game “Pokémon.” In December 2021, Pokémon filed a lawsuit for copyright infringement and unfair competition in the Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court, which ruled in favor of Pokémon and ordered the defendant to pay RMB 107 million in damages. The defendant appealed to the Guangdong High People’s Court.
On December 18, 2024, the Guangdong High People’s Court held a public hearing for the second instance of the “Pokémon” case. The collegial panel narrowed the gap of two parties in identifying facts, laws that applicable, and damage calculations, successfully facilitating a settlement. (February 22, 2025, Xinhua News Agency)
Statistics
National Copyright Administration Releases 2024 Copyright Registration Statistics
1. Overall
In 2024, the total number of copyright registrations nationwide reached 10,630,610, a year-on-year increase of 19.13%.
2. Works Copyright Registration
In 2024, a total of 7,802,965 works were registered for copyright, a year-on-year increase of 21.39%.
The registration volume increased significantly, with the highest numbers in Beijing holding
1,290,130 registrations, 16.53% of the total, followed by Fujian province with 1,257,538 registrations, 16.12%, Shandong province with 817,265 registrations, 10.47%, Hebei province with 516,355 registrations, 6.62%, and the China Copyright Protection Center with 500,200 registrations, 6.41%. These regions accounted for 56.15% of the total registrations.
By type of work, the most registered were artistic works with 4,285,495 registrations, 54.92%, followed by photographic works with 2,478,666 registrations, 31.77%, literary works with 728,096 registrations, 9.33%, and film and television works with 136,345 registrations, 1.75%. These categories accounted for 97.77% of the total registrations.
3. Computer Software Copyright Registration
In 2024, a total of 2,827,213 computer software copyrights were registered, with an obvious increase by 13.31% than previous year.
Geographically, computer software copyright registrations were mainly concentrated in the eastern regions, with approximately 1.61 million registrations, accounting for 57% of the total. (February 28, 2025, CCTV.com)
