Unfair Competition

Hangzhou Intermediate Court: Trademark Ownership Does Not Determine Ownership of Product Packaging and Decoration (Judgment of July 21, 2026)

Hangzhou Intermediate Court: Trademark Ownership Does Not Determine Ownership of Product Packaging and Decoration (Judgment of July 21, 2026)By •

Mengchun’s Comments This case concerns an unfair competition dispute over the ownership of product packaging and decoration following the breakdown of a long-term business cooperation. A particularly noteworthy aspect of the case is that one of the defendants owned the relevant trademark in China. Nevertheless, the court held that the rights and interests in the overall product packaging and decoration […]

Hangzhou Intermediate Court: Trademark Ownership Does Not Determine Ownership of Product Packaging and Decoration (Judgment of July 21, 2026) More »

Shanghai IP Court Further Clarifies the Boundaries of AI Platforms’ Duty of Care for Copyright Infringement (Judgment of April 29, 2026)

Shanghai IP Court Further Clarifies the Boundaries of AI Platforms’ Duty of Care for Copyright Infringement (Judgment of April 29, 2026)By •

Mengchun’s Comments In the first Chinese case involving copyright infringement conducted through a generative AI platform, the Hangzhou Internet Court held that the AI platform provider could be held liable for assisting infringement. The court emphasized that the platform’s fault should be assessed by considering factors including the nature of the service, the popularity of the work, the obviousness of

Shanghai IP Court Further Clarifies the Boundaries of AI Platforms’ Duty of Care for Copyright Infringement (Judgment of April 29, 2026) More »

Jiangsu High Court: Brand Recognition Does Not Automatically Establish Protection for Product Decorations (Judgment of May 27, 2026)

Jiangsu High Court: Brand Recognition Does Not Automatically Establish Protection for Product Decorations (Judgment of May 27, 2026)By •

The court emphasized that brand recognition does not automatically translate into recognition of a product decoration. Even where a brand enjoys substantial market recognition, rights holders should be prepared to prove that the specific product decoration at issue has itself acquired market influence and source-identifying significance. Evidence relating solely to the fame of the brand may not be sufficient.

Jiangsu High Court: Brand Recognition Does Not Automatically Establish Protection for Product Decorations (Judgment of May 27, 2026) More »

Henan High Court: How Criminal Enforcement Helped Sanofi Obtain RMB 1.8 Million in Trademark Damages (2025)

Henan High Court: How Criminal Enforcement Helped Sanofi Obtain RMB 1.8 Million in Trademark Damages (2025)By •

For brand owners, the lesson is simple: criminal enforcement is not only a tool for stopping infringement. In appropriate cases, it may be the most effective way to obtain the sales evidence necessary to support meaningful damages claims in subsequent civil litigation.

Henan High Court: How Criminal Enforcement Helped Sanofi Obtain RMB 1.8 Million in Trademark Damages (2025) More »

Hangzhou Binjiang Court: Failure to Review and Clearly Label AI-Generated Content Constitutes Unfair Competition (Judgment of December 3, 2025)

Hangzhou Binjiang Court: Failure to Review and Clearly Label AI-Generated Content Constitutes Unfair Competition (Judgment of December 3, 2025)By •

For individual users publishing AI-generated content: No “AI-Generated” Defense: Users cannot rely on AI authorship alone to avoid liability. Affirmative Duties Recognized: Users have enforceable obligations to verify content accuracy and provide conspicuous labeling.

Hangzhou Binjiang Court: Failure to Review and Clearly Label AI-Generated Content Constitutes Unfair Competition (Judgment of December 3, 2025) More »

Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court: Generative AI Platforms Producing Promotional “Planting Grass” Content Constitutes Unfair Conduct (Judgment of August 7, 2025)

Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court: Generative AI Platforms Producing Promotional “Planting Grass” Content Constitutes Unfair Conduct (Judgment of August 7, 2025)By •

Mengchun’s Comments:In December 2024, a PRC court held that generating and distributing infringing content of the generative AI services constitutes copyright infringement. In August 2025, the Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court further ruled that even absent copyright subsistence, the use of generative AI services to create promotional “planting grass” content may constitute unfair competition. This precedent effectively supplements the PRC Copyright

Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court: Generative AI Platforms Producing Promotional “Planting Grass” Content Constitutes Unfair Conduct (Judgment of August 7, 2025) More »

Case Concerning the Rejection of All the Claims by Jay Chou （Issued by the Hangzhou Intermediate Court in August 2024）

Case Concerning the Rejection of All the Claims by Jay Chou （Issued by the Hangzhou Intermediate Court in August 2024）By •

Court: Hangzhou Intermediate People’s Court Date of Issuance: August 2024 Case No.: (2024) Zhe 01 Min Zhong 1863 Issue Involved: NetEase organized a giveaway event on Sina Weibo, offering participants the opportunity to win Jay Chou’s new digital album and concert tickets by reposting specific content. Both the event and the related Weibo posts used Jay Chou’s name. The central

Case Concerning the Rejection of All the Claims by Jay Chou （Issued by the Hangzhou Intermediate Court in August 2024） More »

The Very First Case on the Effect of Data Registration Certificate in the PRC (Issued by the Beijing IP Court on June 28, 2024)

The Very First Case on the Effect of Data Registration Certificate in the PRC (Issued by the Beijing IP Court on June 28, 2024)By •

Issue Involved: How can a company assert its data rights? Mengchun’s Comments: Summary of the Court’s Judgment In the landmark case, the Beijing IP court ruled on the legal standing of the Datatang company’s “Data Intellectual Property Registration Certificate” as preliminary evidence of proprietary interests in a dataset. The court also recognized the certificate as preliminary evidence that Datatang’s data

The Very First Case on the Effect of Data Registration Certificate in the PRC (Issued by the Beijing IP Court on June 28, 2024) More »

Scroll to Top