Typical cases of intellectual property protection of procuratorial organs

Notice on Printing and Distributing Typical Cases of Intellectual Property Protection of Procuratorial Organs

The People's Procuratorates of all provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the Central Government, the PLA Military Procuratorate, and the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps People's Procuratorate:

In order to thoroughly implement Xi Jinping's thoughts on the rule of law and Xi Jinping's cultural thoughts, conscientiously implement the Outline for Building a Powerful Country with Intellectual Property Rights (2021-2035), strengthen the legal protection of intellectual property rights, strongly support comprehensive innovation, build a business environment based on the rule of law, and boost the development of new quality productivity, The Supreme People's Procuratorate has selected 9 cases, including "the case of six people including Zhejiang Zhaomou Co., Ltd. and Fang Moujun infringing trade secrets", as typical cases of intellectual property protection of procuratorial organs, and now they are printed and distributed to you for reference when handling cases.

Supreme People's Procuratorate

April 19, 2024

Typical cases of intellectual property protection of procuratorial organs

catalog

1. Infringement of trade secrets by six people including Zhejiang Zhaomou Co., Ltd. and Fang Moujun

2. Copyright infringement case by Liu Mousheng and other three persons

3. Copyright infringement case of Chongqing Qianmou Machinery Equipment Co., Ltd., Guan and Li

4. Case of infringement of trade secrets by three persons including Guan

5. Twenty six people including Xu Youjun fake registered trademarks and sell goods with fake registered trademarks case

6. Ye Moumin's counterfeit registered trademark case

7. Tianchang Xinmou Co., Ltd., Zhanjiang Sumou Co., Ltd., Haikou Yemou Co., Ltd Protests against civil disputes over unfair competition such as companies

8. Shanghai Jinmou Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Jiading District Market Supervision Administration involved in infringement Note A case of supervision over the non litigation execution of administrative punishment of trademark exclusive right

9. "Zhenhu Embroidery" intellectual property protection administrative public interest litigation case

Case 1

Six people including Zhejiang Zhaomou Co., Ltd. and Fang Moujun Infringement of trade secrets

Keywords

Measures for Confidentiality of Evidence for Determining the Amount of Damage in the Whole Chain of Crime of Infringing Trade Secrets

[Main point]

The procuratorial organ, based on its procuratorial function, promotes thorough investigation in a variety of ways, consolidates the evidence system, and prosecute the principal offender of trade secret infringement crimes in accordance with the law in handling cases of trade secret infringement crimes. Accurately identify the loss amount of trade secret obligee, and earnestly safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of enterprises. We will improve the confidentiality measures for evidence involving trade secrets in criminal proceedings, prevent "secondary disclosure", and escort the innovation and development of new technologies and industries.

Basic Case

Qingdao Yunmou Advanced Material Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Yunmou Company) is a listed key high-tech enterprise. In order to overcome the defects and deficiencies in the performance of the equipment used for amorphous strip production, Yunmou Company spent eight years of technical research and development, and successfully improved the core equipment such as the spray coating car, mold, mold grinding mechanism, etc.

From May to July 2016, Mr. Fang, the chairman and actual controller of Zhejiang Zhaomou Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Zhaomou Company), arranged Yumoukun and Zhang Mouwei, senior executives of Zhaomou Company, to establish contact with Yumou, Mengmou and Jiang Moupeng, employees of Yunmou Company in the name of Zhaomou Company, to lure them with cash and high welfare benefits, Illegally obtained the technical secrets related to the core equipment of the amorphous strip production line of Yunmou, such as the spray coating car, the mold, and the mold grinding mechanism. Zhaomou Company established Zhejiang Zhongmou New Material Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Zhongmou Company) to build a new production line of "Zhaomou Phase II" with illegally obtained trade secrets. A gentleman in the rear arranged Yu Erkun and Jiang Erpeng to order relevant classified equipment in the name of a company in China, and arranged Yu and others to poach more than 10 operators from a company in Yunmou to build a new amorphous strip production line the same as Yunmou. The incident occurred two months after the trial operation of the production line, and the products produced have not yet entered the market.

According to the identification of the Judicial Identification Center of Southwest University of Political Science and Law, the technical information contained in the spray car, mold and mold grinding mechanism involved in the case of Yunmou is non-public. After comparing the technical information in the electronic evidence drawings and on-site seizure drawings extracted from Jiang's laptop and mobile phone with the 33 secret point information claimed by Yunmou, 23 of them are the same, and 9 of them are essentially the same. According to the value appraisal of Beijing Liancheng Assets Appraisal Co., Ltd., the appraisal value of the R&D expenses of the technical secrets involved in the case is 40.07 million yuan, which has caused a loss of 19.53 million yuan of licensing fees to Yunmou.

[Performance of procuratorial organs]

On June 2, 2017, Jimo Branch of Qingdao Municipal Public Security Bureau of Shandong Province (hereinafter referred to as Jimo Public Security Branch), after receiving the obligee's report, filed and investigated the infringement of trade secrets of Yunmou Company. Jiang Moupeng and Zhang Mouwei were arrested on August 28 and November 28, 2017, respectively, and voluntarily surrendered on September 11, 2017; After prosecution by the procuratorial organ, Meng and Yu voluntarily surrendered on April 23, 2018 and April 29, 2020 respectively, and Fang was arrested on April 22, 2020. Qingdao Jimo District People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as Jimo District Procuratorate) was invited to hold a consultation with the public security organ on the identification of trade secrets and the amount of losses. In this case, the criminal suspect has set up a similar production line after stealing trade secrets, but the products produced have not yet entered the market. The procuratorial organ suggests that the amount of loss in this case be determined by the licensing fee for trade secrets. At the same time, in view of the fact that the legal representative of the infringing company, Mr. Fang, refused to plead guilty, the public security organ was guided to supplement the evidence materials and comprehensively fix the evidence.

On September 30, 2017, December 14 and May 28, 2021, Jimo District Procuratorate approved the arrest of Jiang Moupeng, Zhang Mouwei and Fang Moujun according to law.

From November 2017 to August 2021, Jimo Public Security Branch successively transferred Jiang Moupeng, Yu Mou, Zhang Mouwei, Meng Mou, Yu Moukun and Fang Moujun to Jimo District Procuratorate for investigation and prosecution for suspected infringement of trade secrets. The procuratorial organs focus on the following work: First, carry out supplementary investigation and consolidate the evidence system. First, comprehensively review the case and dig out the mastermind behind it. The public security organ initially only investigated Jiang Moupeng, Yu Mou and Zhang Mouwei, employees of Yunmou Company. After examination, Meng and Zhao, technical personnel of Yunmou Company, and their actual controllers, Fang and Yu, were all suspected of committing crimes, so they submitted written opinions on investigation and evidence collection to the public security organ. Later, the public security organ put the three people on file for investigation in accordance with the law. Secondly, carry out self supplementary investigation to prosecute unit crimes. The public security organ transferred the case as a natural person crime for review and prosecution, and the procuratorial organ carried out its own supplementary investigation. It was found that the case was organized and implemented by Zhaomou Company to obtain the company's interests, and Zhaomou Company should be investigated for criminal responsibility, so the unit crime was added according to law. The second is to accurately identify the loss of the obligee and determine the amount of crime. In this case, Zhaomou Company illegally obtained the trade secrets of Yunmou Company and successfully built the same production line as Yunmou Company. However, the case occurred only after the production line had been in trial operation for two months. The products have not yet entered the market and there is no sales amount. Therefore, the amount of illegal income cannot be used to determine the amount of crime in this case. In view of the fact that the trade secret has not been known to the public due to criminal acts, which has not led to the complete loss of the value of the trade secret, it is not appropriate to determine the amount of loss based on the R&D cost of the trade secret. After comprehensive research and judgment, the loss amount of this case was finally determined by the trade secret license fee. Upon assessment, the licensing fee for the trade secret is 19.53 million yuan. Third, improve confidentiality measures and strengthen the protection of trade secrets. With regard to the concern about the risk of disclosure of technical materials involved in the case raised by Yunmou Company in criminal proceedings, the procuratorial organ comprehensively combed the possible risk points, fully listened to the opinions of the obligee, and determined the scope of evidence related to trade secrets and corresponding protection measures under the condition of ensuring the smooth progress of the proceedings; The technical data involved in the case shall be placed and managed separately, and the litigation participants shall sign the confidentiality agreement; According to the needs of expert witnesses, the procuratorial organ studies and formulates an accurate list of evidence. In principle, only the parts needed for professional identification are taken, so as to prevent the "second disclosure" of the technology independently developed by the obligee to the maximum extent. Fourth, we formulated and issued procuratorial recommendations to comprehensively strengthen comprehensive judicial protection of intellectual property rights. The procuratorial organ has made two field visits and surveys, delivered procuratorial suggestions to the right enterprises, and promoted the plugging of intellectual property protection loopholes from the system. Yunmou has established a long-term effective secret related management system and confidentiality education mechanism. At the same time, the procuratorial organs regularly go to enterprises to publicize the law, promote enterprise compliance management, and achieve good social governance results.

From June 2018 to November 2021, the Jimo District Procuratorate successively prosecuted the defendants Jiang Moupeng, Yu Mou, Meng Mou, Zhang Mouwei, Fang Moujun, Yu Moukun and the defendant Zhaomou Company for the crime of infringing trade secrets. From November 2018 to December 2022, the People's Court of Jimo District, Qingdao City adopted the prosecution opinions and sentencing suggestions of the procuratorial organ, and sentenced the defendant Zhao to a fine of 3 million yuan for the crime of infringing trade secrets, and sentenced the defendants Fang, Yu, Jiang, Peng and Zhang to fixed-term imprisonment ranging from three to five years, A fine ranging from one million yuan to two million yuan shall be imposed; The defendants were sentenced to one year's imprisonment, suspended for one year, and fined 50000 yuan. Some defendants appealed against the judgment of first instance. On April 18, 2019 and May 4, 2023, the Qingdao Intermediate People's Court ruled to reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment.

Typical significance

（1） To prosecute the principal behind the crime of infringing trade secrets and the unit crime according to law. The procuratorial organs comprehensively used ways such as listening to opinions on major difficult cases and self supplementary investigation to implement the mechanism of investigation supervision and cooperation and consolidate the evidence system. While prosecuting the "insider" of the obligee, the procuratorial organ continued to dig deeply and thoroughly, successfully prosecuted the mastermind of the crime of infringing trade secrets, and additionally identified the unit crime according to law. The procuratorial organ insists on cracking down on the crime of infringing trade secrets in the whole chain, and the relevant technical personnel, from the behind the scenes instigator to the inducement contact person, to the theft and disclosure of technical secrets, are subject to legal sanctions.

（2） Accurately apply the calculation method of obligee's loss to determine the specific amount. In judicial practice, the situation of the crime of infringing trade secrets is relatively complex, and the determination of the amount of crime should adopt the corresponding calculation method according to different situations. The procuratorial organ conducts in-depth research and judgment, comprehensively examines the key facts such as whether the trade secret involved in the case is known to the public due to criminal acts, whether the trade secret stolen by the infringer is put into production, whether the product flows into the market, and whether there is a sales amount, and accurately determines the amount of crime with the licensing fee of trade secret.

（3） Comprehensively study and judge the risk points of "second disclosure" of trade secrets in the process of criminal proceedings, and strengthen the whole process protection of secret related evidence. In the case of infringement of trade secrets, the obligee often worries about the "second disclosure" of trade secrets in the process of criminal proceedings. When handling such cases, the procuratorial organ shall fully listen to the opinions of enterprises, comprehensively sort out the risk points of leakage of secrets in the process of criminal proceedings, formulate targeted protection measures, effectively ensure the smooth proceeding of the case proceedings, minimize the risk of leakage of trade secrets involved in the case, and provide accurate legal services for enterprises.

Case II

Copyright infringement case by Liu Mousheng and other three persons

Keywords

Medical equipment software avoiding technical measures in the crime of copyright infringement Full life cycle protection

[Main point]

The determination of "deliberately avoiding or destroying technical measures" in the crime of copyright infringement should be comprehensively judged around the protection object, protection purpose and protection effect of technical measures on the basis of ascertaining the operation principle of technical means. The procuratorial organ shall punish the crime of copyright infringement by deliberately avoiding technical measures in accordance with the law, and crack down on all links of manufacturing source and sales communication throughout the chain. We will improve the digital copyright protection system, pool the social forces that support comprehensive innovation, implement the full life cycle protection of intellectual property rights, and serve the innovative development of the digital economy.

Basic Case

The obligee Royal Philips Co., Ltd. and its affiliated companies (hereinafter referred to as Philips) and Tongmou Electric Precision Medical Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Tongmou) are medical equipment manufacturers such as CT machines and vascular machines, and have created and published medical equipment software, kit maintenance manuals and other works. In order to protect the copyright of its medical equipment software and the security of its computer information system, the obligee has developed security authentication systems, authentication tools (commonly known as dongles), coder software and other technical measures. The digital certificate issued by the obligee is stored in the dongle. The user needs to use the dongle at the computer terminal to pass the identity verification of the security authentication system before browsing and using the hidden and restricted medical device software functions.

From March 2019 to July 2022, Liu Mousheng, for the purpose of profit, without the permission of the above obligee, made pirated dongle tools to avoid technical measures, provided download links of medical equipment maintenance manuals and other works, and copied nebula workstations AW workstation, Feiyun workstation and other medical equipment software provide download links of medical equipment maintenance manuals and other works, and use the network platform to sell and spread, with a sales amount of more than 910000 yuan. During the period, Liu ordered Liu to open an idle fish account to sell the pirated dongles and medical equipment software mentioned above, with a joint sales amount of more than 140000 yuan.

From March 2020 to July 2022, Liu Mouwang purchased pirated dongle tools from the Internet for profit without the permission of the obligee, copied medical equipment software such as coder, provided online disk download links of medical equipment maintenance manuals, coder software and other works, and used the network platform for sales and dissemination, with a sales amount of more than 150000 yuan.

It is verified that the pirated dongles sold by the above three people have the function of identity verification through the security authentication system, which can avoid the technical measures taken by the obligee for its medical device software; The pirated software sold and disseminated is essentially the same as the works of the obligee.

[Performance of procuratorial organs]

On January 5, 2022, Shanghai Municipal Public Security Organ will put the case on file for investigation, and Shanghai Municipal Public Security Bureau will respectively put Liu Mousheng and Liu Mou on file for investigation, and Putuo Branch of Shanghai Municipal Public Security Bureau will put Liu Mouwang on file for investigation. The Third Branch of the Shanghai Municipal People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as the Third Branch of Shanghai) and the Shanghai Putuo District People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as the Putuo District Procuratorate) launched a mechanism for hearing opinions on major difficult cases, and suggested that the public security organs focus on the following investigation and evidence collection: First, investigate and verify the ownership of the works involved in the case. Obtain more than 30 pieces of medical equipment software, security authentication system creation and publication, ownership registration, software copyright statement, signature interface and other evidence. In view of the fact that some works belong to multiple affiliated companies in multinational group enterprises, the public security organ is guided to conduct special evidence collection on the authorization of overseas obligees to domestic affiliated companies and the admissibility of extraterritorial evidence. The second is to entrust judicial expertise to guide the obligee to identify and explain the works involved and the dongle tool. Based on the expert opinion of the judicial authentication institution and the identification opinion of the obligee, the pirated dongles manufactured and sold by the criminal suspect can pass the identity verification of the security authentication system, and contain more software use rights than the genuine dongles. The medical equipment software involved in the case is essentially the same as the works of the obligee. Third, identify the use risk of infringing software. Using pirated dongles and pirated software to repair precision medical equipment will bring obvious uncertainty to the normal and stable operation of medical equipment, increase the probability of misdiagnosis and missed diagnosis, and may cause the leakage of patient information and data.

On September 2, 2022, the Shanghai Third Branch approved the arrest of Liu Mousheng. On December 2, 2022, the public security organ transferred Liu Mousheng, Liu Mou and Liu Mouwang to the Shanghai Third Branch Office and Putuo District Procuratorate for examination and prosecution on suspicion of copyright infringement. The procuratorial organs focus on the following work: First, fully investigate, study and judge, and clarify the use and effectiveness of technical measures. The procuratorial organ understands the operating principle of technical measures, the management mode of medical equipment maintenance personnel, finds out the access path of maintenance authority certification, and makes clear that the relevant technical measures of the obligee are taken to protect copyright and are effective through field visits and research on the security authentication system and dongle tools applied by the obligee. The second is to dig deep into the crime chain and prosecute the crime of omission according to law. After examination, the procuratorial organ found that the public security organ had missed the fact that Liu Mouwang sold the works of the communication obligee by sharing the link of the online disk and copying and installing software on the second-hand computer, so it applied the provisions of the crime of copyright infringement on unauthorized copying and distribution and dissemination of works through the information network to make additional determination. The third is to make and issue procuratorial suggestions to promote the governance of litigation sources. The procuratorial organ makes and issues procuratorial suggestions on social governance to the obligee, and puts forward optimization suggestions such as filling gaps in technical measures, improving the response time of maintenance and guarantee, and maintaining the safety of public medical activities in view of the intellectual property protection risk points reflected in the case.

On January 31 and February 20, 2023, the Putuo District Procuratorate and the Shanghai Third Branch Office respectively prosecuted the defendants Liu Mouwang, Liu Mousheng and Liu Mou for copyright infringement. The procuratorial organ shall simultaneously guarantee the right to participate in the trial, issue technical opinions and claims, and assist the court to find out the facts. On April 12, 2023, the Third Intermediate People's Court of Shanghai and the People's Court of Putuo District of Shanghai made the judgment of first instance, both adopted the prosecution opinions and sentencing suggestions of the procuratorial organ, and sentenced the defendants Liu Mousheng, Liu Mou and Liu Mouwang to fixed-term imprisonment ranging from one year to three years and two months for the crime of copyright infringement, and imposed a fine ranging from 80000 yuan to 70000 yuan, Apply probation to Liu and Liu. None of the defendants appealed, and the judgment has come into force.

After the completion of the case, in order to meet the protection needs of new technologies and new business forms such as copyright technology measures, the procuratorial organ visited and investigated the regional software industry park, and jointly with Shanghai Copyright Association and other units, issued the Guidelines on the Protection and Compliance of Enterprise Digital Copyright Technology Measures, supporting and encouraging the obligee to improve the digital copyright protection system, and promoting the development and application of technical measures, Coordinate the protection of digital copyright and network security, prompt possible security vulnerabilities and compliance risks, and maintain a good market economic order.

Typical significance

（1） Clarify the criminal regulation path of indirect circumvention of technical measures. The Criminal Law Amendment (XI) added a clause of "deliberately avoiding or destroying technical measures" to the crime of copyright infringement. Indirect circumvention by providing circumvention means and tools is a link in the chain of copyright infringement, which seriously damages the legitimate rights and interests of copyright owners and should be included in the scope of criminal regulation. Without the permission of the obligee, anyone who intentionally manufactures or sells devices or components that are mainly used to avoid or destroy the technical measures specified in Article 217 of the Criminal Law, or intentionally provides technical services for others to avoid or destroy the technical measures, and the amount of illegal income and illegal business reaches the corresponding standard, shall be investigated for criminal responsibility as a crime of copyright infringement.

（2） Accurately grasp the identification conditions of technical measures in the sense of copyright law. In this case, it is clear that the technical measures involved in the case are effective technical measures taken by the obligee to protect the software works, which is the premise of identifying the defendant's criminal act of avoiding or destroying technical measures. The procuratorial organ makes a comprehensive judgment around the protection object, protection purpose and protection effect, and reviews the protection purpose of technical measures in combination with the originals of the computer software and other works involved in the case, expert opinions, the defendant's confession and defense, the obligee's statement, witness testimony and other evidence, so as to find out whether the technical measures aim to protect the works from the principles and functions of the technical measures. At the same time, attention should be paid to reviewing the protection effect of technical measures to ensure that the technical measures can stably and effectively realize the function of restricting others' access to or dissemination of works under normal circumstances.

（3） Rely on the integrated performance of duties and the whole industrial chain to combat crime, and actively carry out compliance governance in combination with the characteristics of the industry. For chain crimes with a long duration, a wide range of sales, and a large amount of crime, the procuratorial organs should adhere to the principle of performing their duties in an integrated manner and pooling the joint efforts of work, effectively crack down on all links of crime, effectively deter illegal acts, and expand the effect of case warning and education. Actively perform duties in accordance with the law, and protect the legitimate interests of relevant operators, consumers and the public in a long-term manner by making targeted and effective procuratorial suggestions. We will work with administrative regulators and industry associations to improve industry compliance standards, build a digital copyright protection system, jointly promote industry governance, ensure full life cycle protection of intellectual property, and protect and regulate the healthy development of digital technology, digital industry and digital market in accordance with the law.

Case 3

Chongqing Qianmou Machinery Equipment Co., Ltd., Mr. Guan, Mr. Li Copyright infringement case

Keywords

Crime of Infringement of Copyright Computer Software Illegal Business Amount Enterprise Compliance

[Main point]

After obtaining the computer software code in the chip through reverse engineering, it is illegal to copy and distribute computer software if the software code is copied without permission to manufacture and sell the same chip. The procuratorial organ reviewed and determined that the infringing chips are only part of the NC system manufactured and sold illegally. Considering the role and value proportion of chips in the NC system, it accurately determined the amount of illegal business. Implement the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy, carry out the compliance rectification of the enterprises involved in the case according to law, strengthen the interpretation of the law and reasoning, and help the murdered enterprises recover their economic losses.

Basic Case

Since 2012, Chongqing Qianmou Mechanical Equipment Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Qianmou Company) has carried out business cooperation with Chengdu Xinmourui Numerical Control Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Xinmourui Company) to purchase machine tool numerical control systems from Xinmourui Company. At the end of 2017, the person in charge of Qianmou Company, Mr. Guan, entrusted Mr. Li, a temporary employee of the company, to reverse crack the software code from the main board chip of the machine tool numerical control system of Xinmourui Company to produce 988T series numerical control system products in order to seek illegal interests. As of September 2021, Qianmou Company has produced and sold 305 988T series CNC products in total. On November 9, 2021, the public security organ seized 89 988T series CNC system products and 380 burned mainboards from a company in Qianmou. It was found that the price of chips purchased by Qianmou Company and Xinmourui Company in early cooperation was 300 yuan/piece. The amount of illegal operation of Qianmou Company was 232000 yuan.

After identification, the hexadecimal code program in the main board chip of the above 988T series CNC system product is 99.99% similar to the hexadecimal code generated by the source code program compiled and converted from the chip with copyright owned by Xinmourui Company.

[Performance of procuratorial organs]

This case is a case jointly supervised by the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the National Copyright Administration and other six departments. On December 21, 2021, Beibei Branch of Chongqing Public Security Bureau (hereinafter referred to as Beibei Public Security Branch) filed a case according to the clues transferred by the copyright enforcement department. Chongqing Beibei District People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as Beibei District People's Procuratorate) puts forward the following suggestions for the public security organs to investigate and collect evidence: First, find out whether it is suspected of infringing trade secrets. In view of the case that the criminal suspect argues that the hexadecimal code in the chip is obtained through reverse engineering, the focus is to find out whether the relevant technical means are feasible and whether the criminal suspect has the reverse engineering ability. The second is to find out the quantity of infringing goods sold. Obtain relevant sales notes, and conduct comprehensive identification based on the testimony of the purchaser of CNC system products and the statement of an official. The third is to find out the components of the CNC system, the functions of each part and the value proportion in the CNC system.

On May 30, 2022, Beibei Public Security Branch transferred the case to Beibei District Procuratorate for examination and prosecution. The procuratorial organs focus on the following work: First, identify the nature of the case according to law. Qianmou Company, without the permission of the copyright owner, obtained the hexadecimal code in the chip through reverse engineering and used it to manufacture and sell the same chip, which is an illegal act of copying and distributing computer software. Second, accurately identify the amount of illegal business. When the public security organ transferred for review and prosecution, the total value of the infringing CNC system was 750000 yuan as the amount of illegal business. After examination and consultation with technical experts in relevant fields, the procuratorial organ made it clear that the chip involved in the case was only a part of the CNC system, and the value proportion of the chip in the CNC system should be comprehensively considered to determine the amount of illegal business. At the same time, the infringing software code is sealed in the chip, which is the main value of the chip. The value of the infringing product can be determined according to the overall value of the chip. Third, actively carry out the compliance rectification of the enterprises involved. After receiving the application for compliance rectification submitted by the company, the procuratorial organ comprehensively reviewed the company's industrial and commercial, employment, tax payment and other materials, together with the relevant departments to conduct field visits, and started the compliance rectification and third-party supervision and evaluation mechanism of the enterprises involved in the case in accordance with the law. During the rectification period, Qianmou Company established product R&D, production and sales approval systems, and improved intellectual property management and compliance risk management and control mechanisms. After the inspection and acceptance organized by the third-party supervision and assessment organization, the enterprise involved was identified as qualified for rectification. The fourth is to implement the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy, and actively pursue stolen goods to recover losses. The procuratorial organ strengthened the interpretation of the law and reasoning, and urged Mr. Guan, Mr. Li, and Mr. Qian to voluntarily plead guilty and plead guilty to punishment. A total of 298000 yuan was returned to Xinmourui.

On November 30, 2023, Beibei District Procuratorate made a decision not to prosecute Qian and Li, and sued the defendant Guan for copyright infringement. On December 21 of the same year, Chongqing Beibei District People's Court made a judgment of first instance, adopted the prosecution opinions and sentencing suggestions of the procuratorial organ, sentenced the defendant to two years of fixed-term imprisonment, three years of probation and a fine of 120000 yuan for the crime of copyright infringement. The defendant did not appeal, and the judgment has come into force.

Typical significance

（1） Accurately identify the nature of the crime of infringing computer software copyright. When handling computer software related cases, the procuratorial organ should comprehensively review the facts and evidence of the case, accurately identify the nature of the behavior, and strengthen the intellectual property protection of computer software according to law. In this case, for the purpose of making profits and obtaining the hexadecimal code of computer software from the chip purchased through reverse engineering without the permission of the obligee, it is illegal to copy and distribute computer software. If the amount of illegal income is large or there are other serious circumstances, the procuratorial organ shall investigate the criminal responsibility for the crime of copyright infringement according to law.

（2） Comprehensively consider the value proportion of infringing software in the overall product, and reasonably determine the amount of illegal business. The chip in this case, as a separable independent unit in the machine tool numerical control system, should be reasonably identified as the function and value proportion of the chip in the system. It is not appropriate to identify the amount of illegal business based on the overall value of the machine tool numerical control system. At the same time, the infringing software code is sealed in the chip, which is the main value of the chip and is inseparable from the chip. The illegal business amount of the copyright infringement crime should be determined by the chip value.

（3） Carry out compliance of enterprises involved in the case in accordance with the law, and practice the concept of attaching equal importance to crime and governance. If the procuratorial organ handles the criminal case of intellectual property infringement and the relevant enterprise meets the conditions for starting the compliance procedure, the compliance rectification procedure of the enterprise involved shall be started in a timely manner according to law. We will implement the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy, and give leniency in accordance with the law to enterprises involved in the case and persons who plead guilty and plead guilty to punishment and who are qualified in the regulation and reform of OECD. Pay attention to the recovery of stolen goods and damages, and the resolution of conflicts and disputes throughout the whole process of case handling, help the injured enterprises recover economic losses, and escort the high-quality development of enterprises.

Case 4

Case of Guan and other three people infringing on trade secrets

Keywords

Cooperative protection of additional prosecution of business information in the crime of infringing trade secrets

[Main point]

Business information trade secrets can bring market competitive advantages to obligees and should be strictly protected according to law. In handling cases, procuratorial organs are able to perform their duties according to law, clarify difficult problems in the application of law, actively carry out self supplementary investigations, and prosecute crimes and omissions according to law. In view of the real dilemma of protecting the rights of private foreign trade enterprises after their trade secrets are infringed, we should promote the coordinated protection of intellectual property rights and establish an integrated protection pattern in which all departments coordinate.

Basic Case

Ningbo Kaimou International Trade Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Kaimou Company) was registered in 2003 and mainly engaged in the import and export business of various goods. The German importer S Company is a customer of Kaimou Company. The company's specific contact person has inquired from Kaimou Company since 2009, and has purchased various products from Kaimou Company, such as trolleys, accessories and straps, on behalf of S Company since 2012. The contact person and e-mail, transaction history, transaction amount, customer demand, customer formation and maintenance and other information formed during the transaction between Kaimou Company and S Company are identified as business information not known to the public.

Guan joined Kaimou Company in 2007 and left in July 2018. He successively served as the business assistant and manager of the business department, responsible for the export business and customer maintenance of S Company. During his employment, Guan signed a Labor Contract and a Trade Secret Confidentiality Agreement with Kaimou Company, stipulating that employees are obligated to keep confidential the company's business information.

In April 2014, Guan registered and established Ningbo Guanmou International Trade Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Guanmou Company). Since 2016, he has used the above business information of Kaimou Company to carry out export business of similar products with Kaimou Company in the name of Guanmou Company with S Company and specific contacts of the company. When Guan resigned from Kaimou Company in July 2018, he took the e-mail of transactions between Kaimou Company and S Company and the purchase contract of Kaimou Company to Guanmou Company without authorization, and continued to sell products to S Company with Zhang and Zhu using the above business information. According to the audit, from 2016 to the end of 2021, Guan and others exported similar products to S Company, with a total sales amount of more than 62.8 million yuan, causing a direct economic loss of more than 5.77 million yuan to Kai Company.

[Performance of procuratorial organs]

On July 30, 2019, the Ningbo Municipal Public Security Bureau of Zhejiang Province received the clues transferred by the Ningbo Municipal Market Supervision and Administration Bureau to file a case for investigation on a company suspected of infringing trade secrets, and on October 14, 2020, the case was transferred for review and prosecution on a company suspected of infringing trade secrets. Ningbo Municipal People's Procuratorate transferred the case to Ningbo Yinzhou District People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as Yinzhou District Procuratorate) for handling. After examination, the Yinzhou District Procuratorate believed that the business activities of Guanmou Company since its establishment were foreign trade transactions with S Company, which belonged to the company established by Guanmou for the purpose of carrying out illegal and criminal activities, did not constitute a unit crime, and the criminal responsibility of Guanmou should be investigated directly. The procuratorial organ focuses on the following work: First, it accurately determines that in-depth customer information constitutes trade secrets. After examination, the business information involved in the case contains a number of core transaction elements, such as the specific contact person and mailbox, purchase product demand, quality requirements, transaction product type, transaction volume, transaction price, payment terms, supply factory information, etc., which are gradually accumulated, improved and summarized by a company for specific customers in long-term business activities, It is a set of complete and interrelated in-depth comprehensive information, which is not generally known or easily obtained by people in the field, and should be recognized as trade secret. The second is to examine and verify that Guan has actually used the trade secrets of the obligee. The procuratorial organ carried out its own supplementary investigation, retrieved the original materials such as emails and purchase and sale contracts between Kai and S, compared them one by one with the business materials that Guan brought to Guan when he left office, confirmed that the two were completely consistent, and then carefully checked the correspondence emails, transaction contracts and other documents between Guan and S, The business information of Kaimou Company was compared with that of Kaimou Company one by one in the form of list, and it was confirmed that they were essentially the same, and Guan quoted the quotation of Kaimou Company several times as a reference when negotiating prices with S Company. The third is to exclude the plea of personal trust. Guan and his defender proposed that Company S made transactions with Mr. Kai based on the trust of Mr. Guan. After Mr. Guan left, Company S voluntarily chose to make transactions with Mr. Guan's company. In this regard, the procuratorial organ consolidated the evidence to clarify. First, the first transaction between S Company and Kai Company was initiated by S Company for inquiry, and then the long-term transaction was started, which was handled by Jiang and Guan successively; According to the email content, it is the quality, price and service of the goods provided by Kaimou that facilitate the transaction between the two parties, rather than the trust of a certain operator. Secondly, the application condition of personal trust defense is that after the employee leaves the company, Guan used the business information of Kaimou Company as early as his tenure in Kaimou Company to trade with Company S in the name of Guanmou Company, which does not apply the personal trust exemption principle. Fourth, reasonably calculate the loss amount. According to the industry characteristic that the profit rate of foreign trade enterprises is calculated based on the amount of sales of products, the procuratorial organ proposed the method of multiplying the amount of sales of infringing goods by the profit rate of similar products of the obligee, which provides a reference path for the calculation of the amount of crime in similar cases. Fifth, additional criminal facts were prosecuted. After examination, the procuratorial organ found that Guan still established a foreign trade company in the name of others to continue trading with Company S during the period of obtaining a guarantor pending trial after the criminal case was filed. Therefore, we cooperated with the public security organ to screen out the foreign trade companies involved in the case using the customs foreign trade export data platform, and verified that a customs officer continued to carry out the infringement with the cooperation of the accomplices after the administrative investigation and even after the criminal case was filed, and the transaction amount reached more than 50 million yuan. The procuratorial organ immediately changed the compulsory measures, decided to arrest Guan, added more than 4.9 million yuan of losses caused by the crime, and suggested the public security organ to file a case to investigate the co criminals Zhang and Zhu.

In January and August 2022, Yinzhou District Procuratorate will prosecute the defendants Guan, Zhang and Zhu respectively for the crime of infringing trade secrets. In January and September 2023, Ningbo Yinzhou District People's Court (hereinafter referred to as Yinzhou District Court) made a judgment of first instance, adopted the prosecution opinions and sentencing suggestions of the procuratorial organ, sentenced the defendant Guan to four years' imprisonment and a fine of RMB 4 million for the crime of infringing trade secrets; The defendants Zhang and Zhu were sentenced to one year and eight months' imprisonment, suspended for two years, and fined 40000 yuan and 50000 yuan respectively. Guan appealed against the first instance judgment. On April 13, 2023, the Ningbo Intermediate People's Court ruled to reject the appeal and uphold the original judgment.

In view of the loopholes and risk points found in the protection and management of trade secrets in the local foreign trade industry in the process of handling the case, Yinzhou District Procuratorate and Yinzhou District Court jointly issued suggestions to Ningbo Foreign Trade Association to guide foreign trade enterprises to improve and implement trade secret protection measures. Ningbo Foreign Trade Association adopted it, jointly issued a cross sectoral foreign trade cooperation mechanism, carried out trade secret risk self-assessment in more than 100 foreign trade enterprises, and trained more than 10000 foreign trade practitioners. In May 2023, the Yinzhou District Procuratorate, together with the Yinzhou District Public Security Branch, the Market Supervision Bureau, the Bureau of Commerce, the Federation of Industry and Commerce, the Customs and other departments, will sign the Strategic Cooperation Agreement on Strengthening the Cooperative Protection of Business Information Trade Secrets in the Foreign Trade Industry to jointly promote fair competition and healthy and orderly development of the foreign trade industry. In November of the same year, the Yinzhou District Procuratorate issued the Guidelines for the Proof of Enterprise related Intellectual Property Rights Protection, which pointed out the path for how to protect the rights of market entities after intellectual property rights were infringed.

Typical significance

（1） Strengthen the judicial protection of business information trade secrets, and escort the healthy development of foreign trade market. Business information is an important form of trade secrets, which has important commercial value for market entities, especially foreign trade enterprises, to gain competitive advantage. In handling the case, the procuratorial organ actively carried out self supplementary investigation, and solved the problem of "difficult to get into prison" for infringing business information trade secrets. Comprehensively analyze the formation process and specific content of business information, focus on whether it is the in-depth comprehensive business information accumulated by the enterprise for a long time and whether the criminal suspect actually uses the information, carefully review the objective facts such as customer development and maintenance process, relevant transaction time, and synthesize the evidence of the whole case, Screening criminal suspects' excuse that the transaction between customers and enterprises is based on the personal trust of specific employees. At the same time, the procuratorial organ insists on digital empowerment, makes full use of the customs foreign trade export data platform to verify all criminal facts, prosecute crimes and omissions, and ensure that the facts are clear and the prosecution is in place.

（2） We will promote multi sectoral coordinated protection and actively integrate it into the overall pattern of comprehensive governance. The procuratorial organ, based on its experience in case handling, combined with regional economic development and industry characteristics, established a "quick response" mechanism for coordinated protection and linkage of cross sectoral intellectual property rights by jointly preparing and issuing social governance recommendations with the People's Court, leading multiple departments to sign strategic cooperation agreements, and issuing guidance on proof of intellectual property rights protection, Improve the protection level of business secrets in the foreign trade industry in a multi-dimensional way, effectively solve the "stubborn disease" that hinders the healthy development of private enterprises, and work together to promote fair competition in the foreign trade industry and promote healthy and orderly development.

Case V

Twenty six people including Xu Moujun fake registered trademarks and sell Commodity case of counterfeit registered trademark

Keywords

Crime of Counterfeiting Registered Trademarks Crime of Selling Commodities with Counterfeiting Registered Trademarks

[Main point]

When dealing with cases of counterfeiting and sales involving a large number of people, a wide range of cases, and complex cases, the procuratorial organs give full play to the role of investigation supervision and cooperation mechanism, timely put forward suggestions for investigation and evidence collection, improve the evidence chain, and achieve a precise attack on the entire chain of production, supply, and sales. Implement the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy, comprehensively consider the status, role, illegal profits, subjective malignancy and other factors of the persons involved in the case, and deal with them in a hierarchical and classified manner. Adhere to the concept of equal protection, safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese and foreign obligees in accordance with the law, and help optimize the legal business environment.

Basic Case

From July 2015 to April 2021, Xu Youjun, Zhuang Youkuan and others, without the permission of the owner of the "ROLEX" registered trademark, partnered to rent warehouses in Panyu District, Guangzhou City and other places to purchase unmarked watch movements, entrusted Hou Youyan and others to disassemble the movement and print the "ROLEX" logo, and purchased watch straps, watch cases and other spare parts with the "ROLEX" logo from Cai Youxing and others, Employ Zeng Moufeng and others to assemble, carry out quality inspection and packaging, and then sell to Wang Mou and other first level agents, and then sell to Yu Mouran and other second and third level agents. Agents conduct publicity through online platform advertising, establish sales WeChat groups, physical store sales and other means of external sales. The amount of illegal business of the above personnel ranges from more than 230000 yuan to more than 332 million yuan, and the illegal income ranges from 50000 yuan to more than 20.75 million yuan.

[Performance of procuratorial organs]

On February 19, 2021, the Runzhou Branch of Zhenjiang Public Security Bureau in Jiangsu Province (hereinafter referred to as Runzhou Public Security Branch) received a number of reports of citizens buying fake Rolex watches, and put Yu Mouran and others on file for investigation on the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks. The People's Procuratorate of Zhenjiang Economic Development Zone (hereinafter referred to as the People's Procuratorate of Zhenjiang Economic Development Zone) was invited to participate in the investigation. In view of the fact that the watch movement is a regular product purchased from the manufacturer, and the quality of the assembled product meets the relevant standards, it is recommended that the public security organ focus on the crime of trademark infringement to carry out investigation: first, dig deep into the source of counterfeiting to achieve a full chain attack. Analyze the transaction details, purchase orders, logistics information and WeChat users of the sellers at the end of the chain layer by layer, comprehensively trace the upstream crimes, and find out the source, operation mode and organizational structure of infringing goods sales according to law. The second is to clarify the identification of accomplices and make precise convictions. Focus on verifying whether the spare parts supplier and the primary general sales agent who only participate in the sale of counterfeit goods constitute a joint crime with the counterfeiter. In view of the fact that nine people including Cai Mouxing lack joint criminal contact with those who assemble and produce fake watches, which makes it difficult to identify a joint crime, according to the name and purpose of counterfeit "ROLEX" registered trademark watchbands, watchcases, etc., it is determined that the goods approved for use with the registered trademark are "the same kind of goods", and their production and sales of spare parts separately constitute the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks, The illegal business amount shall be calculated separately according to the selling price and quantity of the above-mentioned spare parts. For Wang and other sales agents who only sell fake watches and do not participate in the manufacturing of fake watches, it is determined that they constitute the crime of selling counterfeit registered trademarks. Third, accurately determine the amount of crime. The criminal amount of each criminal suspect was calculated by sorting out and auditing the accounting book of the counterfeiting and selling gang and more than 230 bank cards involved in the case, and combining the verbal evidence of the persons involved in the case. The fourth is to classify according to the situation. In the early intervention stage, the procuratorial organ, based on the overall situation of the case and the circumstances of each person involved in the case, proposes to take custodial coercive measures against the persons at the source of counterfeiting; It is suggested to take non custodial coercive measures for the persons involved in the counterfeiting and selling gangs who have a good attitude of confession, a relatively small role, a relatively small profit, and little social risk; Persons who only receive a small amount of fixed salary and whose circumstances are obviously minor may not be treated as crimes.

From July 2021 to January 2022, Runzhou Public Security Branch applied to the Zhenjiang Economic Development Zone Procuratorate for approval to arrest 8 people, including Xu Moujun, Zhuang Moukuan, Hou Mouyan and Cai Mouxing, for the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks, and 7 people, including Wang Mou and Yu Mouran, for the crime of selling counterfeit registered trademarks. The Zhenjiang Economic Development Zone Procuratorate approved the arrest of the above-mentioned 15 people according to law. In addition, the Runzhou Public Security Bureau obtained a guarantor pending trial for Zeng Moufeng and other 11 people.

From October 2021 to March 2022, Runzhou Public Security Branch successively transferred 26 people, including Xu Youjun, to the Zhenjiang Economic Development Zone Procuratorate for examination and prosecution for the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks and the crime of selling counterfeit registered trademarks. The procuratorial organs mainly carry out the following work: First, additional crimes and omissions according to law. The public security organ only recognized the fact that Xu's illegal business amounted to more than 130 million yuan from September 2019 to April 2021, but after verifying the bank's transaction details and interrogating the persons involved, it was found that Xu and Zhuang jointly produced and sold fake statements from July 2015 to September 2019, and there was a transaction flow of more than 100 million yuan between Xu and Zhuang during this period, so Zhuang was prosecuted, The transaction details were further verified, and the interrogation of other accomplices was strengthened. Finally, Xu's illegal business increased from more than 130 million yuan to more than 332 million yuan, and the public security organ supplemented and transferred Zhuang Moukuan, a counterfeiter with illegal business of more than 196 million yuan, to be investigated and prosecuted. The second is to implement the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy and urge people to plead guilty and accept punishment. The interpretation of the law was strengthened, and 22 suspects were urged to plead guilty and accept punishment at the stage of review and prosecution, and 3 defendants pleaded guilty and accept punishment at the stage of trial. When making sentencing suggestions, we should fully consider each person's specific behavior, role, profit amount, social harmfulness, confession and punishment and other circumstances. It is suggested that the real punishment should be applied to the main personnel of the source of counterfeiting, and the accomplices and sellers of counterfeiting who have a good attitude of confession and repentance and a small amount of money involved should be given leniency in accordance with the law. Third, protect the legitimate rights and interests of obligees in accordance with the law. The procuratorial organ visited the agent company of the obligee in China, served the notice of the obligee's litigation rights and obligations in criminal cases of intellectual property infringement, informed the way of right relief and the progress of the litigation, and listened to the opinions on the authenticity of the commodities involved in the case, the scope of commodities approved for use by the trademark registration certificate, etc., so as to effectively guarantee the obligee's right to know and the right to participate.

From December 2021 to March 2022, the Procuratorate of Zhenjiang Economic Development Zone successively prosecuted 26 people, including Xu, for the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks and the crime of selling counterfeit registered trademarks. From June to July 2023, the People's Court of Zhenjiang Economic Development Zone made a judgment of first instance, adopted the prosecution opinions and sentencing suggestions of the procuratorial organ, and sentenced the defendants Xu Moujun, Zhuang Moukuan, Hou Mouyan, Cai Mouxing, Zeng Moufeng and other 14 people to one to six years' imprisonment for the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks, with a fine ranging from 60000 to 50 million yuan; 12 defendants, including Wang Mou and Yu Mouran, were sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of two years to five years and seven months for the crime of selling counterfeit registered trademarks, and a fine ranging from 130, 000 yuan to 3 million yuan was imposed, with some being suspended. None of the defendants appealed, and the judgment has come into force.

Typical significance

（1） Dig deep into the source of upstream crimes and realize the whole chain attack. The defendant in this case sold fake goods through WeChat friends circle, and the "circle" of trading was relatively closed. The selling price of infringing goods was far lower than the market price. Some consumers knew about the fake goods and bought them. It was difficult to find clues to the manufacture and sale of fake goods, and to investigate and deal with them. The case was reported to the police because the buyer was dissatisfied with the after-sales service. In the early stage, the investigation direction was mainly aimed at the end of the chain of counterfeiting and selling. The procuratorial organ implemented the requirements of the whole chain of combating intellectual property infringement crimes, paid attention to digging up the clues of upstream crimes, successfully prosecuted the counterfeiters and parts suppliers of infringing goods, and identified an additional crime amount of more than 100 million yuan, Form the resultant force of the whole chain strike work to achieve the goal of "hitting the source, end socket and breaking the chain".

（2） Implement the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy, and achieve hierarchical and classified treatment. In this case, the level of counterfeiting and selling is clear, the division of labor is clear, and the number of people involved is large. The procuratorial organ fully considers the participation of gang members, criminal behavior, illegal income, attitude of confession and repentance and other factors, and accurately evaluates the crime size and criminal responsibility of each actor. The person in charge of the counterfeiting gang and the personnel engaged in important positions such as organization and management will be identified as the principal offenders, and will be severely punished according to law. It is suggested that the actual punishment should be applied and a high fine should be imposed; Those who are less involved, less effective and less profitable are identified as accomplices, and it is suggested that lenient punishment be given according to law, and probation be applied in some cases; Persons who only receive a small amount of fixed salary and whose criminal circumstances are obviously minor will not be subject to criminal punishment.

（3） Adhere to equal protection in accordance with the law and help optimize the legal business environment. The object of infringement in this case is an international well-known trademark. Fake watches were sold to more than 20 provinces in China, with a criminal amount of more than 332 million yuan, which seriously infringed the legitimate rights and interests of trademark owners and consumers. The procuratorial organs adhere to the judicial concept of equal protection of Chinese and foreign intellectual property rights holders according to law, strictly implement the notification system of the rights and obligations of the rights holders in criminal cases of infringement of intellectual property rights, fully protect the rights of the rights holders to know and participate, severely punish crimes of infringement of intellectual property rights, and create a legal business environment for the operation and development of various market entities.

Case 6

Ye Moumin's Counterfeiting Registered Trademark Case

Keywords

Social Governance of Criminal Protest against Illegal Business Amount of Crime of Counterfeiting Registered Trademarks

[Main point]

When handling criminal cases of counterfeiting registered trademarks, procuratorial organs should, according to the role of trademarks in indicating the source of goods, correctly identify the goods marked by trademarks, distinguish between independent goods and components of goods, and accurately identify the amount of illegal business. If the judgment of the court is indeed wrong, the procuratorial organ shall strengthen the integrated performance of the upper and lower courts, perform the legal supervision function of criminal protest according to law, and ensure the uniform and correct implementation of the law.

Basic Case

Germany West Group Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Germany West Company) is the owner of "DELIXI" registered trademark. From 2015 to 2020, Ye Moumin forged the "DELIXI" logo nameplate and installed it on the distribution box and distribution cabinet assembled and equipped by himself without obtaining the distribution box production qualification and without the permission of Dexixi Company, and then sold 447 distribution boxes and 21 distribution cabinets in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region and other places, The total amount of illegal operations is 658000 yuan.

[Performance of procuratorial organs]

On June 5, 2020, the Public Security Bureau of Wushen Banner, Ordos City, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region filed a case for investigation on Ye Moumin's suspicion of counterfeiting a registered trademark, and on October 21, the case was transferred to the People's Procuratorate of Wushen Banner for review and prosecution. On November 4, 2020, the People's Procuratorate of Wushen Banner submitted the case to the People's Procuratorate of Ordos City, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region (hereinafter referred to as the Ordos Municipal Procuratorate) for review and prosecution. The procuratorial organs focus on the following work: First, correctly distinguish between independent commodities and components of commodities. After review, it is confirmed that Ye Moumin configures the distribution box (cabinet) by himself, assembles the purchased genuine components into the box (cabinet), and then sells the assembled distribution box (cabinet) externally. The box (cabinet) body and components should be regarded as a whole commodity; The second is to accurately identify that this case is not a unit crime. A unit crime should have such constitutive elements as "committing a crime in the name of the unit" and "the illegal gains belong to the unit for use". After examination, although Ye signed a sales contract in the name of the company, he organized and carried out criminal acts such as forging trademark marks, installing logo nameplates, assembling distribution boxes (cabinets), installing and maintaining goods in the name of an individual. The above criminal activities could not reflect the will of the unit without the consent of the company, and Ye designated his personal account to collect payment for goods, The illegal gains were not used by the unit, so the procuratorial organ determined that the case did not constitute a unit crime.

On February 4, 2021, the Ordos Municipal Procuratorate filed a public prosecution against Ye Moumin for the crime of counterfeiting a registered trademark. On June 7, the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Ordos Intermediate People's Court (hereinafter referred to as the Ordos Intermediate Court) made a judgment of first instance, finding that the defendant Ye Moumin was guilty of counterfeiting a registered trademark, but believed that the distribution box (cabinet) assembled by Ye Moumin It is not a binding relationship with the components. The components in the box (cabinet) are authentic, and the value of the components should be deducted from the amount of illegal business. Therefore, the amount of illegal business is 134700 yuan only based on the value of the box and cabinet of the distribution box (cabinet). The defendant Ye Moumin was sentenced to two years' imprisonment, three years' probation, and a fine of 70000 yuan.

After examination, the Ordos Municipal Procuratorate believed that the first instance judgment wrongly identified the components of the goods as independent goods, leading to the wrong identification of the amount of illegal business. In this case, the genuine components assembled by Ye Moumin in the distribution box (cabinet) exist as a part of the distribution box (cabinet), and the components are not independent goods, which is different from the mixed sale of the true and false independent goods. What the defendant Ye Moumin sold to the customer was a complete set of distribution box (cabinet) goods, not a single component and shell, or a simple combination of the two. The core function of the trademark is to indicate the source of the goods. According to business practices and relevant public awareness, the trademark in this case indicates the source of the distribution box (cabinet), rather than the source of the components or the box (cabinet) shell. Therefore, the amount of illegal business should be determined based on the overall price of 658000 yuan of the complete set of distribution box (cabinet) equipment, and the value of components should not be reduced. On June 17, 2021, the Ordos Municipal Procuratorate protested against the defendant Ye Moumin's misjudgment in the first instance verdict and his misjudgment. The People's Procuratorate of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region believed that the reasons for the protest were sufficient, and that there were errors in the first instance judgment, and supported the protest opinion. After the second instance, the Higher People's Court of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region ruled to remand the case for retrial.

After the retrial, the chief procurator of the Ordos Municipal Procuratorate attended the trial committee of the Ordos Intermediate Court as a nonvoting delegate. On December 30, 2022, the Ordos Intermediate Court made a new judgment of first instance, adopted the protest opinion of the procuratorial organ, and found that the defendant Ye Moumin committed the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks. The amount of illegal business was 658000 yuan, sentenced to three years and six months of imprisonment, and fined 330 thousand yuan. After the judgment of the first instance, the defendant Ye Moumin lodged an appeal. On June 15, 2023, the Higher People's Court of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region ruled in the second instance to reject the appeal, uphold the original judgment, and the judgment has come into force.

Since the distribution boxes (cabinets) with fake registered trademarks sold by Ye Moumin are mainly used in airports, stadiums, residential areas and other public places, Ye Moumin has not replaced the infringing goods since the incident, and there are certain fire hazards. In order to ensure the safety of people's lives and property, the Ordos Municipal Procuratorate issued social governance procuratorial recommendations to the city's market supervision and emergency management departments, urged the implementation of administrative supervision responsibilities, and timely eliminated fire hazards. In addition, the Ordos Municipal Procuratorate also contacted the procuratorial organs of Yinchuan City and Shizuishan City, Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, where the counterfeit goods were sold, respectively, to inform them of the use of the counterfeit goods in this case, and the local procuratorial organ would inform the emergency management department of the jurisdiction of the relevant situation.

Typical significance

（1） Accurately identify the amount of crime in the case of counterfeit registered trademarks of assembled goods. The defendant in this case illegally manufactures and sells to customers a complete set of distribution box (cabinet) goods, rather than a simple addition of components and box (cabinet) shell. Components are part of the goods rather than independent goods. The use of its trademark also indicates the source of the distribution box (cabinet), rather than the source of individual components or box (cabinet) shell. Therefore, the amount of illegal business shall be determined by the value of the complete set of distribution boxes (cabinets), and the value of components shall not be deducted.

（2） Fully perform the legal supervision function of procuratorial organs according to law, and ensure the uniform and correct implementation of laws. The procuratorial organ shall uphold an objective and fair position. If it finds that the people's court's judgment is indeed wrong in handling a criminal case of infringement of intellectual property rights, it shall lodge a protest according to law, carefully analyze the reasons why the court does not accept the opinions of the prosecution, and improve the pertinence and effectiveness of the protest. In this case, the judgment of the court of first instance wrongly identified the amount of crime. On the basis of accurate application of the law, the procuratorial organ strengthened the integrated performance of the upper and lower courts, raised a precise protest according to law, and supervised and corrected the wrong judgment.

Case 7

Unfair competition between Tianchang Xinmou Co., Ltd. and Zhanjiang Sumou Co., Ltd., Haikou Yemou Co., Ltd Civil dispute protest case

Keywords

Protest against invalidation of packaging and decoration trademarks with certain influence of unfair competition

[Main point]

If the trademark is declared invalid due to its adverse effects, the packaging and decoration of the goods designed with the trademark and related elements as the core shall not be protected by the anti unfair competition law as the packaging and decoration of the goods with certain effects. The procuratorial organ should pay attention to the retrieval of similar cases in the supervision, make precise protests, and ensure the uniform judgment standards.

Basic Case

On April 12, 2018, Zhanjiang Sumou Co., Ltd, To the People's Court of Yuhang District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province (hereinafter referred to as the Court of Yuhang District).

On October 28, 2018, the Yuhang District Court made a judgment of first instance, holding that Su is an authorized manufacturer of "special soldier squeezed coconut juice" products, and enjoys the unique packaging and decoration rights of well-known commodities. Yemou company and Xinmou company use packaging and decoration similar to the well-known goods of Sumou company without authorization, which constitutes unfair competition. Judge Yemou Company and Xinmou Company to stop unfair competition against Sumou Company, compensate Sumou Company for economic losses (including reasonable expenses) of 150000 yuan, and reject other claims. A new company refused and appealed to the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court in Zhejiang Province. On August 14, 2019, the second instance judgment rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment. A new company applied to Zhejiang Higher People's Court for retrial. On December 5, 2019, the court ruled to reject the retrial application of a new company.

[Performance of procuratorial organs]

A new company applied to Hangzhou People's Procuratorate of Zhejiang Province (hereinafter referred to as Hangzhou People's Procuratorate) for supervision. After accepting the case, the procuratorial organ focused on the following work: First, finding out the situation of the No. 11118542 trademark "The SPECIAL ARMS and its figure" in the packaging and decoration elements involved in the case. It is found that the trademark has been ruled invalid by the State Intellectual Property Office, which believes that "Special Forces" is a well-known name of arms. If it is used as a trademark on approved goods, it is easy for the relevant public to associate goods with military supplies, and it is easy to have a negative impact on China's political, military and other public interests and public order, which constitutes the Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China The circumstances referred to in Item (8) of Paragraph 1 of Article 10. After administrative litigation, the court upheld the above ruling. The second is to find out the adjudication of similar cases. The trademark No. 16972248 "The SPECIAL ARMS and its pictures", which is the same as the trademark signs in the packaging and decoration elements involved in the case, has been identified by the court as having adverse effects and cannot be used as a trademark. The Supreme People's Court, in both the (2019) Supreme People's Court Civil Decision No. 4847 and the (2020) Supreme People's Court Civil Decision No. 133, held that, since the elements of packaging and decoration involved in the case claimed by Su are all directed to special forces, the "special forces" were considered to have adverse effects when the effective judgment found that the words and graphics of "special forces" would be registered as trademarks The packaging and decoration involved in the case in which words are used as obvious identification parts shall not be protected as the packaging and decoration with certain influence in the sense of the Anti Unfair Competition Law.

After examination, the procuratorial organ believed that the packaging and decoration of the goods involved in the case of Su's company were designed with the "Special Forces" trademark and related elements as the core. The existing effective judgment found that the relevant trademark signs would have adverse effects and should not be used as trademarks. The court has determined in similar cases that the packaging and decoration of coconut juice commodities that should not be protected by the Anti Unfair Competition Law are basically the same as those involved in this case. The package and decoration of the commodity involved in the case take the "Special Forces" trademark and related elements as the significant identification part, and other constituent elements such as camouflage patterns in the package and decoration have a high degree of correlation with the words and graphics of the trademark, so the package and decoration involved in the case do not have the legitimate basis for obtaining legal protection, and should not be used as the packaging The decoration is protected by the Anti Unfair Competition Law. The Hangzhou Municipal Procuratorate submitted a protest to the Zhejiang Provincial People's Procuratorate.

On January 17, 2023, the People's Procuratorate of Zhejiang Province filed a protest to the Zhejiang Higher People's Court. On June 13, 2023, the Zhejiang Higher People's Court made a judgment that the packaging and decoration involved in the case were designed with the "Special Forces" trademark and related elements as the core, in which the No. 11118542 trademark was completely presented on the commodity packaging and decoration, and the "Special Forces" trademark and related elements were an organic part of the packaging and decoration involved in the case, Rather than elements that can be replaced at will. Now there is an effective judgment that the "Special Forces" words and graphics that are identical to the trademark logo involved in this case will have adverse effects as a trademark registration. In this case, taking the "Special Forces" trademark and related elements as the package and decoration involved in the case as a significant part of the identification, because they are inseparable from the trademark, it is easy to cause consumers to regard the package and decoration as a whole with the "Special Forces" It is difficult for Lenovo to be protected by the anti unfair competition law. Other elements in the decoration such as camouflage patterns involved in the case have a high degree of correlation with the words and graphics of the "special forces" trademark, which is difficult to become an independent right basis and cannot be protected by the anti unfair competition law as an influential package and decoration. The Higher People's Court of Zhejiang Province ruled that the judgments of the first and second instance should be rescinded, and all claims of Sumou Company should be rejected.

Typical significance

（1） Analyze the relationship between trademark, packaging and decoration, and determine the legal protection basis. According to the provisions of Article 6 of the Anti unfair Competition Law, the business operators use the same or similar marks on the packaging and decoration of the goods that have certain influence on others without authorization, which causes confusion and leads people to mistakenly believe that they are the goods of others or have a specific connection with others, which is an act of unfair competition. The packaging and decoration of a commodity revolves around the design of a registered trademark. The registered trademark and the elements related to the registered trademark play a significant role in identifying the packaging and decoration. When the trademark is declared invalid due to adverse effects, if it is still recognized that the packaging and decoration are protected by the anti unfair competition law, it means that the adverse factors will continue to exist through the packaging and decoration. In the case that packaging and decoration are closely related to such invalid trademarks and are difficult to peel off, the packaging and decoration of goods designed with trademarks and related elements as the core will not have the legitimacy basis for legal protection, and should not be protected by the Anti Unfair Competition Law as an influential packaging and decoration.

（2） Pay attention to case retrieval to ensure quality and efficiency of supervision. Unique packaging and decoration play a role in identifying the source of goods to a certain extent, and can promote the circulation of goods in the market. When designing packaging and decoration, operators should pay attention to avoiding the use of elements that are likely to have adverse effects, not damaging national interests and social public interests, and maintaining socialist core values and social public order. The Supreme People's Court has previously identified the case of unfair competition disputes caused by the design of the commodity packaging and decoration that is basically the same as that involved in this case, and the conclusion of the handling of such cases has important reference significance for this case. In the case of similar cases, the procuratorial organ should find out the adjudication of similar cases in the supervision of civil litigation cases to ensure the consistency of adjudication standards.

Case 8

Shanghai Jinmou Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Jiading District Market Supervision Administration Bureau involved in administrative punishment for infringement of the exclusive right to use registered trademarks Non litigation execution supervision case

Keywords

Administrative non litigation enforcement Application for enforcement Approval of enforcement Procuratorial recommendations

[Main point]

When supervising the execution of administrative cases by courts, procuratorial organs can simultaneously issue procuratorial suggestions to courts and administrative organs to strengthen synchronous supervision over administrative penalty decisions that do not meet the statutory requirements for compulsory execution but are approved by courts, and the results are attributable to the application behavior of administrative organs and the review behavior of courts.

Basic Case

On February 28, 2022, Shanghai Jiading District Market Supervision and Administration Bureau (hereinafter referred to as Jiading District Market Supervision and Administration Bureau) imposed an administrative penalty on Shanghai Jinmou Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Jinmou) for its infringement of the exclusive right to use a registered trademark, ordered it to immediately stop the infringement, confiscate the infringing goods and impose a fine of 131275.55 yuan, And delivered the above-mentioned decision on administrative punishment to a company in accordance with the law.

On July 28, 2022, the Market Supervision Bureau of Jiading District electronically delivered the Notice on the Implementation of Administrative Penalty Decision to a company for the reason that it failed to pay the fine. On September 1 of the same year, a company filed an administrative lawsuit with Shanghai Jiading District People's Court (hereinafter referred to as Jiading District Court), which was accepted on October 10. On November 24 of the same year, the Market Supervision Bureau of Jiading District applied to the Jiading District Court for the enforcement of the above administrative penalty decision. After accepting the application for enforcement, the court ruled on December 16 to grant compulsory enforcement.

[Performance of procuratorial organs]

When Shanghai Jiading District People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as Jiading District Procuratorate) performed its procuratorial and supervisory duties according to law, it found that the company had filed an administrative lawsuit with the Jiading District Court within the statutory period before the Jiading District Market Supervision Bureau applied for compulsory enforcement of the administrative penalty decision on a company today, but the court still accepted the application for compulsory enforcement and made a ruling approving the enforcement. The Jiading District Procuratorate then started the supervision procedure for this clue according to law.

The procuratorial organ focuses on the following work: First, obtaining relevant case files. After investigation to the Jiading District Court, a company filed an administrative lawsuit against the administrative penalty decision to the Jiading District Court on September 1, 2022. The court accepted the case on October 10, and the Jiading District Market Supervision Bureau responded to the lawsuit as the defendant of the administrative lawsuit on the same month. The second is to obtain relevant civil judgments. According to the investigation, on June 12, 2020, a company was judged by the court to constitute trademark infringement due to the violation of the exclusive right to use the registered trademark of a building materials technology company in Shanghai by the building materials gusset plate produced and sold today. Today, a company continued to produce and sell its trademark after slightly modifying its logo, which was seized by the Market Supervision Bureau of Jiading District and made the above administrative punishment decision. Third, hold case seminars. The procuratorial organ, together with the Jiading District Court and the Jiading District Market Supervision Bureau, held a case seminar and learned that this case occurred because different departments within the Jiading District Market Supervision Bureau were responsible for responding to administrative litigation and applying for non litigation enforcement, and there was a lack of information exchange mechanism between departments.

After examination, the procuratorial organ believes that Article 53 of the Administrative Compulsory Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that "if a party neither applies for administrative reconsideration or brings an administrative lawsuit within the statutory time limit, nor complies with the administrative decision, an administrative organ without the power of administrative enforcement may, within three months from the date of expiration of the time limit, apply to the people's court for compulsory enforcement in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter". Article 97 of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that "if a citizen, legal person or other organization neither brings a lawsuit nor performs the administrative act within the statutory time limit, the administrative organ may apply to the people's court for compulsory execution, or enforce the administrative act according to law". Today, a company has filed an administrative lawsuit against a specific administrative act in the court within the statutory time limit, and the market supervision department still applies to the court for compulsory enforcement knowing the relevant circumstances, in violation of the above provisions. The first paragraph of Article 160 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that "after the people's court accepts the case that an administrative organ applies for the execution of its administrative act, the administrative tribunal shall review the legality of the administrative act within seven days and make a decision on whether to approve the execution". The court has accepted the administrative lawsuit filed by a company today, and at the same time ruled that the application for compulsory execution filed by the Market Supervision Bureau of Jiading District was approved, in violation of the above provisions.

On February 21, 2023, the Procuratorate of Jiading District issued a procuratorial proposal for the case to the Jiading District Court, proposing to revoke the ruling granting enforcement, strengthen the review of non litigation enforcement applications, strengthen case information related retrieval, and prevent "simultaneous trial and enforcement". At the same time, the Jiading District Procuratorate made and issued a procuratorial proposal to the Jiading District Market Supervision Bureau for the illegal application for compulsory execution by administrative organs.

After receiving the procuratorial suggestions, the Market Supervision Bureau of Jiading District promoted the implementation of rectification. First, comprehensively identify the cases that have applied for compulsory enforcement since 2021, and sort out and compare the overlap of administrative litigation and non litigation enforcement cases. The second is to improve the internal information exchange mechanism, strengthen the horizontal communication between the law enforcement supervision and management department and the relevant business departments, and improve the submission and approval of the application for compulsory execution cases. Third, give full play to the coordinating and guiding role of the legal department, and urge relevant departments to implement the administrative litigation response. Fourth, the Notice on Implementing the Provisions on the Procedure of Applying for Court Enforcement of Administrative Punishment was formulated to further clarify the preconditions and internal approval process for applying for court enforcement of administrative punishment decisions.

On February 23, 2023, the Jiading District Court replied and adopted the recommendation of the procuratorial organ, rescinded the original ruling, and agreed with the Jiading District Market Supervision Bureau to withdraw the non litigation enforcement application. The procuratorate of Jiading District and the court of Jiading District jointly carried out a special activity of administrative non litigation execution to sort out and investigate the administrative non litigation execution cases handled by the court of Jiading District in recent five years, and the court of Jiading District specially formulated the acceptance and review process of administrative non litigation execution cases. At the same time, the procuratorate and the court visited and investigated the administrative law enforcement agencies in the whole region, comprehensively explored and sorted out the initiation and acceptance of administrative non litigation enforcement cases within the jurisdiction, timely urged the two administrative agencies with similar problems to correct illegal acts, and suggested that some administrative agencies improve their internal case handling mechanisms to avoid similar situations.

Typical significance

（1） Perform duties according to law and strengthen supervision over administrative non litigation execution. The supervision of administrative non litigation execution is an important duty of procuratorial organs. Article 108 of the Rules for the Supervision of Administrative Proceedings of the People's Procuratorates stipulates that "the people's procuratorates shall exercise legal supervision over the execution of administrative cases by the people's courts". Administrative non litigation enforcement means that after the administrative organ makes an administrative decision, the administrative counterpart does not apply for administrative reconsideration or file an administrative lawsuit within the statutory time limit, and still does not perform the determined obligations after being urged to do so. The administrative organ without the power of enforcement applies to the court for enforcement, and the court accepts The system of reviewing and making a ruling to allow the administrative organ to enforce or directly take coercive measures to enforce, so that the content of the administrative decision of the administrative organ can be realized. The development of procuratorial supervision of administrative non litigation execution is conducive to promoting the relevant organs to implement and administer according to law.

（2） Actively perform their duties and strengthen the simultaneous supervision of justice and administration. When the procuratorial organ supervises the execution of administrative cases by the court, it shall simultaneously review whether the administrative organ has illegal applications. For the administrative penalty decision that does not meet the requirements of the statutory compulsory execution application but is approved by the court, and the result is attributed to the application behavior of the administrative organ and the review behavior of the court, in order to ensure the accuracy of the application of the law and firmly promote the administration according to law, the procuratorial organ should strengthen the synchronous supervision role. On the one hand, through procuratorial suggestions, the court is urged to revoke illegal administrative non litigation enforcement rulings and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the parties in administrative litigation. On the other hand, it urges the administrative organ to correct the illegal application behavior, find and analyze the root causes and system loopholes of the illegal application behavior, improve the working mechanism, and promote the administrative procuratorial work from case supervision to similar case governance.

Case 9

Administrative Public Interest Litigation Case of "Zhenhu Embroidery" Intellectual Property Protection

Keywords

Intangible cultural heritage geographical indication administrative public interest litigation pre litigation procedure social governance

[Main point]

The procuratorial organs should strengthen the comprehensive protection of intellectual property rights in the field of traditional culture, take administrative public interest litigation as the entry point, promote the administrative organs to perform their duties in accordance with the law, constantly improve the intellectual property protection of intangible cultural heritage and geographical indication products, promote the leak stoppage and source protection, and help the development of traditional culture.

Basic Case

On May 20, 2006, Suzhou embroidery was approved by the State Council to be included in the first batch of national intangible cultural heritage list, with heritage number of Ⅶ - 18. Zhenhu Street, Huqiu District, Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province, is the main birthplace of Suzhou embroidery. In 2010, "Zhenhu embroidery" was listed as a national geographical indication product protection. At the beginning of 2023, many embroiderers reported to the procuratorial organ through the WeChat applet of "Suzhou Embroidery Inspection Service Center" and "Suzhou Embroidery E-Checkthrough" that there were frequent intellectual property disputes in Suzhou Embroidery, which were mainly manifested in the flooding of the market with machine embroidery pretending to be manual embroidery, and frequent disputes over the patent rights of appearance designs of Suzhou embroidery products and the copyright of Suzhou embroidery manuscripts. The above situation not only damages the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, but also seriously affects Xiuniang's creation, business operation and the development of the Suzhou embroidery industry. It is not conducive to the protection and inheritance of national intangible cultural heritage and geographical indications, and social and public interests are violated.

[Performance of procuratorial organs]

The People's Procuratorate of Huqiu District, Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province (hereinafter referred to as the People's Procuratorate of Huqiu District) believes that Suzhou embroidery, as a national intangible cultural heritage, is an important part of the traditional culture of the Chinese nation. "Zhenhu Embroidery" is a national geographical indication product, and a fresh carrier to protect and inherit excellent traditional culture. On April 18, 2023, the Huqiu District Procuratorate filed an administrative public interest lawsuit against the protection of Suzhou embroidery.

After investigation, the procuratorial organ found that it was difficult to protect the intellectual property rights of Suzhou embroidery in terms of copyright, trademark, design patent, geographical indication, etc. The Procuratorate of Huqiu District issued the administrative public interest litigation procuratorial recommendations to the Suzhou High tech Zone (Huqiu District) Market Supervision and Administration Bureau (Intellectual Property Office) (hereinafter referred to as the Huqiu District Market Supervision Bureau), suggesting that it investigate and deal with the sales of fake and inferior Suzhou embroidery products, strengthen the protection of geographical indications of "Zhenhu Embroidery", and increase the protection of intangible cultural heritage of Suzhou embroidery. The Market Supervision Bureau of Huqiu District attached great importance to the suggestions of the procurator, strengthened the investigation and punishment of the acts of machine embroidery posing as manual embroidery and the production of embroidery that did not meet the standards of Zhenhu Embroidery, a product of geographical indications, improved the complaint and reporting mechanism of Suzhou embroidery intellectual property infringement, warned and interviewed relevant merchants 9 times, and mediated 5 disputes over intellectual property transactions between embroiderers, Maintain the trading order of Suzhou embroidery market in the jurisdiction.

In order to strengthen the source governance, improve the self-discipline level of the industry and the awareness of safeguarding rights according to law, the Procuratorate of Huqiu District, through the social governance procuratorial advice, promoted Zhenhu Embroidery Association to strengthen the management of the embroidery market and intellectual property protection, and strive to build a famous brand of Zhenhu Embroidery. Zhenhu Embroidery Association attaches great importance to comprehensively investigate the ownership of Suzhou embroidery intellectual property rights, encourages Suzhou embroidery creators to carry out copyright registration by using the Suzhou embroidery copyright trading platform, summarizes the usual design of Suzhou embroidery, and completes patent application and rights protection. Zhenhu Embroidery Association has helped its members to apply for 27 registered trademarks, 20 invention patents, and nearly 100 design patents. At the same time, it gave full play to the advantages of the industry association, actively used mediation and reconciliation to resolve intellectual property disputes, improved the right holders' awareness of protecting their rights according to law, increased the publicity of law popularization, and improved the self-discipline level of the industry.

In handling the case, the Procuratorate of Huqiu District found the difficulties and blocking points in the protection of Suzhou embroidery through investigation, led and coordinated the administrative organs and industry associations to jointly formulate the Several Opinions on Promoting the Development of Zhenhu Suzhou Embroidery Industry, promoted the establishment of the "Suzhou Embroidery Brand Law Guarantee Center" in the whole district, and strengthened the judicial linkage, execution connection Cooperation in protection and other aspects. At the same time, the Procuratorate of Huqiu District has formulated and issued the Guidelines for Strengthening the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights of Suzhou Workers and Suzhou Workers to promote the protection, inheritance and innovative development of excellent traditional culture.

Typical significance

（1） We will protect intangible cultural heritage and geographical indication products through public interest litigation. Intangible cultural heritage is an important symbol of the historical and cultural achievements of the country and the nation, and an important part of China's excellent traditional culture. Geographical indication products refer to products produced in a specific region, whose quality, reputation or other characteristics depend essentially on the natural factors and human factors of the origin. Geographical indication products contain regional unique natural ecological environment and historical and cultural factors, which is the guarantee of product quality and reputation. In performing its duties, the procuratorial organ should focus on the problems in the protection and inheritance of intangible cultural heritage and geographical indications, sort out the specific manifestations of infringement of trademark rights, copyrights, patents, geographical indications and other types of intellectual property rights that may be involved in traditional culture, make overall use of multiple procuratorial functions, and make procuratorial suggestions on administrative public interest litigation, social governance We will actively build a comprehensive performance model that conforms to the characteristics of intellectual property cases in the field of traditional culture, and protect intangible cultural heritage and geographical indication products in accordance with the law.

（2） We will strengthen coordinated protection and promote social governance. The protection of intangible cultural heritage and geographical indication products needs the joint work of judicial authorities, market supervision departments, intellectual property management departments, etc., and needs to coordinate with multiple departments to discuss good policies. The procuratorial organ strengthened the comprehensive protection of intellectual property rights, gave full play to the advantages of public interest litigation coordination, and promoted all departments to perform their duties jointly through round table consultations, procuratorial suggestions, countersignature and cooperation mechanisms, so as to achieve resource sharing and overlapping advantages, and make the coordinated protection of intellectual property rights a powerful driving force for the innovative development of traditional cultural industries. Give full play to the advantageous role of industry associations in contacting enterprises, conduct in-depth visits, field research, discussion and exchanges, promote the improvement of industry governance level with procuratorial suggestions, form a joint force to protect intangible cultural heritage and geographical indication products, and create a good situation of joint construction, governance and sharing of intellectual property protection in the field of traditional culture.